Biological Ethics

_{Table of contents}

Chapter 4. Deontological aspects of the university student

F. Ponz

a) Introduction

In addition to considering the ethical principles that should govern the professional actions of biologists in their various specific professions, it seems appropriate to take into account some other more general ones, which derive from the specific condition of being a person trained at a university, i.e. being a university graduate.

The years of intellectual activity and human coexistence spent during the programs of study of a degree program, the way of being of the environment and the entire life of a University, leave a legacy that is manifested in features that are difficult to describe, which together make up what has come to be called style, disposition or university spirit, something not well defined, but easily appreciable, which allows those who have studied at programs of study to discover. They are traits of an intellectual and cultural nature in a broad sense, which contribute to shaping one's own personality and which must be reflected in one's conduct, and are of ethical importance.

It is undoubtedly a source of satisfaction to note that during the last few decades the personality of the different social strata has become broader, largely due to the commendable work of the educational centres, which has led to increasing access for all class people to the various levels of teaching, including the University. There are also many and varied institutions that are interested in raising the cultural level of society, to which the different media, press, radio, television, etc., also contribute in their own way. All this has succeeded in attenuating the exaggerated contrasts that existed in the past according to the family background and the level educational that each person had been able to attain. Notwithstanding this attenuation, the University continues to leave its mark on those who attend its classrooms, a mark that can be recognised in the particular development of various qualities that confer special responsibilities.

These qualities of the university temperament can of course be found in any person, because they belong to the human personality. What happens is that they can be exercised more intensely at university. But it should be made clear from the outset that they are not exclusive to those who have studied at the University, nor are they necessarily present in all those who have acquired higher academic Degrees , as it is not uncommon to find refractory cases that are impermeable to the influence of the University.

It seems obvious, indeed, that the incorporation of the university spirit will depend on many personal circumstances and, in particular, on the Degree of insertion, communicability, sensitivity and openness with which one participates personally in the life of the University. And it will also depend, on the other hand, on how the function of the university is understood in the academic corporation.

With regard to this last point, there is general agreement that the University should concern itself with the higher teaching and the scientific research . And that in the professor aspect, the aim should be a dynamic transmission of knowledge that awakens the active and creative participation of students, so that by the end of the degree program they have acquired sufficient basic and specific knowledge corresponding to their specialization program, essential for the exercise of their future professional activity, as well as study habits, intellectual work , the ability to handle sources, and a certain familiarity with the appropriate methodology.

The greatest differences appear when dealing with the role of the University in the human Education of the students, in the responsibility that may correspond to it when it comes to arbitrate means that favour the integral development of the student's personality, the interest in the diverse manifestations of culture, the appreciation of the values of the spirit. The discrepancies arise when it comes to the question of whether the University should be concerned with more than preparing students for the "technical" exercise of their future profession; and, if the answer is affirmative, with the concept of man and life that should inform this activity.

There are many gradations between the extreme positions of the "professionalist", who only wants to attend to "technical" knowledge for the future profession, and that of the one who puts all his effort into promoting the person's Education , into training cultivated people, with little dedication to professional knowledge. In any case, the solution that a university adopts will depend to a large extent on the university spirit that is acquired. It is clear that if the University is dominated by a pragmatic and "professionalist" idea, in which everything is geared to the acquisition of "utilitarian" knowledge for the profession and any other activity is considered a waste of time, it will be difficult to acquire a university spirit and instead a "product" as qualified as you like will be sent out into society, who will perhaps be able to provide solutions to the technical questions posed to him, as a highly programmed robot could, but who will most probably have very little judgement and personality, ignoring the questions of greater importance for his own life and that of his fellows.

It therefore seems more appropriate that the University should seek to provide society with men who are not only professionally well prepared, but who are at the same time cultivated, discerning, open-minded people, capable of using their profession correctly in the service of men and of participating freely and responsibly in the various activities of social life. When these objectives are taken into account and the University does not neglect its educational mission statement in the human and spiritual sphere, it finds the means to stimulate the personality development , to awaken interest in a wide range of subjects of importance to man, to stimulate cultural initiative and to create an appropriate environment for the university spirit to emerge with natural spontaneity in each individual. From the ethical point of view, there is no doubt that the University, as an educational institution, must contribute as much as possible to the student's becoming a man of judgement, aware of his responsibilities.

On the other hand, perhaps today more than in the past, society needs people who are well rooted in the characteristics of the university student. In today's society, as a consequence of scientific and technical progress, of the complexity and high level of interdependence that exists between different sectors, there is a strong tendency towards depersonalisation, towards considering man as a thing, as issue, an element of a machine, of a mass, of a collective with global behaviour. The great systems, the macro-structures, the supposedly great collective objectives, imprison, constrain or even despise the individual human being, giving rise to an ideological and psychological contamination that suffocates man in much more serious terms than contamination by physical or chemical factors. In these circumstances, it is vital for society that the University be capable of exalting Education man as a human being, of exalting and ensuring that all the values inherent to the human person, including, of course, the ethical principles guiding his moral conduct, are deployed to the full. refund Man must be made fully aware of his dignity, his status as the master of Nature, and at the same time be given a deep sense of responsibility to exercise this mastery freely in accordance with the highest aims and in the service of others. This should be the constitutive and informing core of the university spirit, which no university should neglect. If the University does its utmost to enliven and strengthen this spirit, it will make a most valuable contribution to society, for which it could hardly be replaced.

b) Traits of the university student

If the core of the university spirit, as has just been said, is based on an upright and committed consideration of the dignity of man, which leads to facing the consequent responsibilities, the possession of this spirit should be manifested in a set of traits that reveal - or should reveal - those who have come out of a university. To attempt to describe them, in an orderly fashion, would be a daring venture doomed to failure. However, in what follows we are going to take that risk, in the certainty that other important aspects will be missed and that, as has already been said, these traits are not exclusive to university students, nor can they be seen in all of them. It is to be hoped, however, that they are sufficiently illustrative to outline some of the ethical characteristics that one is entitled to expect from someone who has been educated at a university.

Cultivation of the spirit, interest in cultural values

The university student possesses a wide capacity for interest free of utilitarianism, a great intellectual "curiosity", which is practically universal in itself, limited only by the human impossibility of satisfying it, which obliges him to select certain areas to cultivate more thoroughly. However, this intellectual habit leads him to acquire a certain Degree of knowledge of many aspects of human knowledge, to contemplate with joy the various manifestations of artistic creation, to take an interest in the history of man, in his way of thinking, in his significance, in his future. He considers all these things to be very valuable cultural values which he would like to be able to attain, which deserve his attention. It is logical that each person is attracted to some manifestations of culture more than others, but in principle they all seem of interest to him, he is in tune with all of them and any of them produces more or less intense resonances in his spirit. The university student thus turns out to be, although in Degree very variable, a cultivated, cultured man, for whom things do not slip, but are the object of reflection. He is a person who is capable of conversing on a wide range of topics of human interest and of posing profound questions because he has the habit of considering reality in depth, of thinking about the various issues.

It is by no means a question of the university student knowing everything about everything, since he cannot even know everything about the field in which he is working. training What is important is that, in addition to seeking to acquire mastery of his or her specialization program, aware of how much of it he or she does not know, he or she should want to possess sufficient basic knowledge about the great questions that give light, orientation and meaning to human life and should be awake and sensitive to the various expressions of the human spirit that make up culture.

Study habit

The university years generate the habit of wanting to know in depth the issues on which one has to form an opinion. The university's own methodology is based on studying the data of a problem, reflecting on its different aspects, and analysing the pros and cons of possible solutions. The answer to a new question should not be improvised, but must be studied beforehand, and for this it is necessary to have the necessary information at one's disposal.

Even if one has had little access to the scientific bibliography , one has acquired the conviction that much has been thought and written about any subject , so that before attempting to discover or contribute something original, it is more honest and profitable to simply and studiously turn to the abundant existing publications, because in other cases one runs the risk of discovering what is already known, if not of falling into error or nonsense.

The university student is also aware that it is not usually easy to discover the truth and penetrate it from the first attempt; he knows that the truth shies away from him: one glimpses it for a moment and then it disappears, as if the truth wanted to slip away; he knows that he has to insist again and again, to go round and round the questions, until he gets hold of the truth. For this reason, the university student does not allow himself to be carried away by improvisation, or by lightness; nor does he allow himself to be subjected to approaches that present these characteristics; he is wary of those who abuse the glancing blow, he knows that he has to defend himself against first impressions, and that before establishing a value judgement he needs to study the matter with work , to know the data, to weigh the reasons in one direction or another, to pay attention to the different aspects of the problem, to the different parts that enter into conflict in a status.

Critical rigour

The critical attitude, the capacity for discernment, the habit of analysis, is another undoubted quality of the university student, perhaps one of the most outstanding. It leads him to discriminate between truth and error with the appearance of truth; between well-founded affirmation and gratuitous or insufficiently supported affirmation. He acutely discovers sophistry and deception. This habitual attitude defends him from the "slogan", protects him from being dazzled, allows him to firmly reject what he understands to be wrong, not to accept something as truth simply because it is repeated with insistent insistence; it prevents him from giving in to the argument of an authority that does not deserve his trust and he does not accept a solution or a behaviour as good simply because it is endorsed by the majority. Before accepting a proposal, he needs to know what it is all about and to be sufficiently convinced.

For this reason, the authentic university student is difficult to manipulate, he resists any attempt to manipulate or instrumentalise him; he does not allow himself to be influenced - let alone dragged along - because the issue of those who have adopted a certain position is greater or lesser; he is not Pass to be herded to and fro. This is why he is sometimes labelled a "rebel".

Intellectual humility

Certainly, the habit of critical rigour, of analysis staff of the questions just mentioned, can lead the university student to an easy deviation: to the excessive evaluation of his own criteria, to not admitting anything he cannot understand, to underestimating fields of knowledge far from his own; in short, to intellectual self-sufficiency or even, if you like, to intellectual arrogance.

But this deviation does not usually occur when there is finesse of spirit, when there is true insight. Because scientific rigour itself leads one to show one's personal limitations, and even one's entire human inadequacy. And so, the true university student usually possesses that valuable quality of intellectual humility, by which one is very aware of the weakness of what one knows and the immensity of what one does not know, and which is usually accompanied by a certain insecurity in oneself, a distrust of one's own appraisals, the desire to contrast opinions and data, to respect and appreciate the honest contributions of others, and to admire the progress made in other scientific fields, to which he can sometimes appear to be charmingly naïve. He grasps with increasing clarity man's reduced and laborious capacity for understanding, his abysmal ignorance of so many things, the infinity of questions that remain unanswerable. And he admits that there may be a reality that escapes him, that he does not perceive, but which he guesses to be higher and brighter.

Criterion

As result of reflecting on things and going deeper into questions, a criterion is acquired, as something that is sedimented over the years. A criterion in whose training multiple elements have intervened, but which has already become staff, is integrated in oneself. The criterion is very directly included in the personality; it is an element through which one's being staff is manifested. The "man of judgement" is never part of the masses, he is not conformist, he does not submit passively, he will never be the plaything of others in the manner of a programmed "robot". Whatever the environment that surrounds him, he does not allow himself to be dragged along by it, he does not drift in it, nor does he get shipwrecked in it, but adopts his own course staff. If necessary, it goes against the current, and even creates a more or less extensive sphere of influence around itself, to which it radiates its own way of understanding things.

To be a man of judgement - of right judgement - is to have a approach and a correct response to the most important situations and problems, to be capable of framing facts and arguments in fair coordinates, to have a serene, considered, real vision of things.

In the midst of today's maelstrom of life, in a world of so much confusion, haste and bewilderment, in which deception, error or simple unfounded affirmation are proclaimed and disseminated with persuasive means of great reach and power of penetration, it is of utmost importance that the university student incorporates with his or her desire for truth, with his or her reflective, thinking habit, that good judgement which is light for oneself and for others, which confers strength and ensures autonomy and freedom manager, when judging a matter or adopting a decision.

Consistent attitude

The qualities mentioned so far mean that the university student does not usually adopt a position without a certain maturity of the topic, that he is not easy to convince without sufficient arguments, that he does not indulge in superficial reasoning, nor admit the authority of others lightly. Pragmatic and impulsive temperaments often have the impression that they are confronted with someone who is too slow, too hesitant and hesitant, which makes them somewhat despairing. However, once a cultivated man has acquired sufficient conviction on some point, it is strongly rooted in the mind, because the light which has been kindled in his intelligence no longer declines, and the adherence which has been given to that discovered truth is very firm and stable.

This explains why, when one is intellectually well convinced of something, it is not possible to admit error about it; one cannot give in either out of a misguided desire to please, or for fear of being branded as intransigent. Much less understandable would it be to hold personally a position against what one knows to be true. Soundness in one's convictions thus leads to being loyally consistent with them, not only in the sphere of intellectual adherence, but also in guiding one's own conduct.

It is true, however, that sometimes man, through his own weakness, can feel the attraction of inferior interests to such an extent that his intelligence is clouded, that what was once clearly seen is blurred, and that, closing his eyes to the light and turning a deaf ear to the voice of conscience, he denies with his deeds what he can no longer deny with his mind. This guilty and unethical concession, especially if it is sufficiently repeated, awakens a tendency towards justification in order to make the contrast and dissociation between what is understood and what is done less harsh. This can also lead to a weakening or even erasure of this firm conviction. But often, especially if the intellectual training of the university student has been genuine, this contradiction in the works, this lack of consequence in the conduct, is recognised for what it is, as a surrender of the will, and false justifications and self-deceptions are not accepted; then it is also often felt as an inner impulse that moves one to rectify, to return to congruence between thought and life, to recover ethical rectitude.

It seems obvious to say that being consistent with one's own convictions cannot be a reason to be labelled as conceited or obstinate. It would be conceited to trust only oneself and to despise the reasons of others as inferior to oneself. He would be obstinate who does not want to be open to other reasons, who prefers to maintain his own opinion even if he perceives that he may be wrong. The good university student likes to give reasons for what he thinks and to have others do the same: when he is firmly convinced of something, because he wishes to help those who think otherwise out of error; and when he has a simple opinion on a subject topic, because he hopes that knowing what others think on the same subject will enlighten his intelligence.

Love of freedom

One cannot be consistent with one's own ideas if one has no ideas about things. But those who are truly university students have acquired judgement on many issues, more firm on some, less sure on others. And, above all, they do not change their way of thinking in the face of flattery, simple friendship, or external pressure or threats, they do not allow themselves to be bought by advantages or flattery. He only changes because the data and the reasons he receives, with the assurance they deserve, lead him to understand that he was wrong, thus acquiring a new and firmer conviction.

This undoubtedly means that the university spirit gives those who possess it greater independence, being much more jealous of freedom, and is so both of their own freedom and that of others. One can be forced by physical or moral coercion, by "pressure" to do what one does not want to do, but one knows perfectly well that there is an intimate sphere and staff in which no one has the possibility of breaking in to force one against one's will.

One is all the freer the more clearly one discovers the truth enclosed in the terms of a choice, the more and the better one knows it; and also the more one discovers the deceptiveness of a fallacious appeal. On the other hand, the more easily one is led astray by others, the less one is accustomed to reflecting and deciding for oneself, the more one is disarmed to realise the falsity of a reasoning, the incongruity of an approach. These people, who have little or no intellectual acuity, can be wrapped up in pretty or sound phrases, in a few sophisms, in empty, albeit apparent, arguments. And in this way, they are manipulated by one or the other, they are not truly free. Those who have a university spirit, on the other hand, behave very differently, they do not allow themselves to be manipulated or deceived, they are more in control of themselves, they know they are independent and are not prepared to let anyone bend their freedom, even if this attitude may entail many sacrifices. submission In reality, he acts more like a "person", and when he fully commits himself to an ideal, he does so by virtue of a decision of his own free will, because he is truly convinced by something.

Respect for others

The high value placed on the staff way of understanding issues, on the need to acquire personal convictions, and the rejection of any action that seeks to impose itself by violence, also prevents the attempt to force others to think as one does. Respect for oneself is demanded and a delicate respect for others is also maintained.

As mentioned above, university students feel sure of very few things, they are aware of the weakness of many of their opinions and not only do they not mind, but they also like to contrast their opinions with those of others in order to achieve greater enrichment and come closer to the truth.

For all these reasons, when explaining his opinion to others staff or even when trying to make them understand what he is sure of, he always likes to be respectful of different or antagonistic positions. He does not usually resort to categorical, direct, crushing affirmations that leave no room for disagreement, but prefers to present his own reasons in an insinuating way, so that, little by little, the interlocutor can glimpse them and then come to understand them without feeling obfuscated at any time by too much light. The aim is more to suggest than to affirm; to illustrate rather than to dominate; to make it easier for others to discover aspects that they had not considered or errors that they had previously considered to be true, much more than to impose oneself with apodictic arguments or those of mere authority.

It will be very rare for a good university man to understand that an opinion different from his own is absolutely rejectable, and much stranger to regard it as irrational. He always thinks that however mistaken an assertion may be, when it is maintained by a respectable person it must be based on some foundation, it must be true in some respect, or perhaps it stems from an error in the starting point which is not noticed. And he endeavours to understand all the reasons of the dissenting party in order to realise in what respects he is right and in what respects he is wrong. Only with this attitude will there be mutual communication of thought and both will be in a better position to accept.

Consequently, the good university student is not an authoritarian, closed in on his own convictions, but is always open to dialogue and to understanding those who have other ways of thinking, because his usual disposition is that of someone who wants to teach and learn, to improve his own knowledge and to offer it to others so that they can participate in it. As result of this open and sincere exchange of opinions, presided over by respect for others, everyone is enriched and progressively approaches the truth. It is not a matter of "getting one's own way", of winning or losing, but of finding the truth. As a result, sometimes one will convince the other, sometimes one will be convinced oneself, and there will also be cases in which opinions continue to differ, but with gains for mutual understanding and respect.

Nothing could be further from a conversation between real university students than a heated, violent and vociferous argument or dispute, as if a reasoning acquires more convincing power by shouting it out or in a way that is insulting or contemptuous of those who do not accept it. It is not a matter of exchanging views in the same way that punches are thrown in boxing, in order to defeat and annul the opponent. No matter how sure you are of something, you cannot convince the other person by force. The only way is to try to open the other person's mind to the truth, to lead him, with respect and affection, to discover the weakness of the support on which he based his erroneous opinion, to make him perceive the reasons for the position he previously rejected, until he makes it his own. And all this without at any time being able to feel hurt, without any undermining of dignity staff.

Respect for those who think differently, respect for the freedom of others, should not be interpreted as a sign of weakness of conviction, as a sceptical or relativistic stance. It is simply the result of a high regard for human freedom and the conviction that truth can never be imposed on the mind from outside, but that in order to be accepted it must first be contemplated, understood or at least given reasons worthy of sufficient trust.

Sense of human dignity and social coexistence

The university student who has acquired the intellectual habits we have been considering is in an excellent position to deepen his understanding of man's character staff and to act accordingly. He thus becomes a powerful and tenacious defender of human dignity in the face of the strong tendencies that threaten to overwhelm man, leaving him subject to blind impulses that overtake him on all sides and depersonalise him. Faced with the risks of massification, of collectivisation, of man being reduced to the status of issue, a passive and irresponsible subject, a mere plaything of the environment, of circumstances, of a supposedly blind force of history, it is more necessary than ever to deepen the value of the human person; to appreciate the real fact that man is an intelligent and free being, manager of his actions, with spiritual and material needs, with rights and obligations; a being who is a subject of history, capable of influencing history for better or for worse, of contributing to a better or less good society, of making relations between people more or less just and pleasant.

When we speak in general of the dignity of the human person," says Millán Puelles, "we are not thinking only of the value of men who act righteously, but of the fact that every man, by the fact of being a person, has a higher status than any irrational being...". Consequently, there is a lordship of man over the world, a right to obtain from the nature that surrounds him what he needs, so that, by means of work, natural beings are at the service of the human person and the latter can cultivate higher values, so that man can "attend to the needs of the spirit".

With his intelligence, man can penetrate the knowledge of the nature of things, their meaning and purpose, their relationship to the Creator; he can glimpse God, listen to him and better understand with his financial aid the meaning of human existence, man's ultimate destiny, his role in the whole of Creation, the subject of relationships that bind him to other men, a whole set of realities that are the origin of universal and inalienable rights and duties. The more conscious man is, the more he discovers his relationship with God, especially if his intelligence is enlightened by the Christian faith, the more meaningful his being becomes staff, the freer he can be, the less dependent on circumstances. Knowing himself to be a person, he does not seek to hide himself in anonymity, but faces situations and takes personal, free, definite decisions, facing up to the consequent responsibilities.

But, furthermore, man lives in society, in union with many other people like himself, with whom he establishes multiple interrelationships. And this happens because it is human nature, so that all can satisfy their material needs and even more their spiritual needs, helping each other and complementing each other in accordance with their different aptitudes and functions. Every member of society is, as a person, equally respectable; he or she has the same essential dignity, without this meaning that all possess the same qualities or that all deserve the same consideration for their conduct.

It is perfectly legitimate for society to honour and award award to those who sample behave in an exemplary manner and stand out for their generosity, just as it is legitimate for society to punish those who culpably violate the rights of others. But it must never hurt anyone's dignity because everyone has the right to be seen and respected as a person.

This profound sense of human dignity must govern social coexistence and the shaping of society itself. We live in society because man has a social dimension; he tends to relate to and communicate with others and wishes to give to others and to receive from them. And also because human cooperation is necessary for subsistence itself, for the best and most orderly use of resources, for the availability of appropriate services, for the splendid development of the various forms of knowledge, science and technology. Life in society requires organisation and diversification of functions, and implies a dense interweaving of personal interdependencies. All of this implies that the activities of one and all must be co-ordinated, the wills of all must be harmonised, so that everyone can develop a dignified life and at the same time achieve common objectives, so that the particular good of each person and the general good of society as a whole can be achieved. In the event of conflict, as is reasonable, the good staff must be subordinated to the common good. But, as Millán Puelles makes clear, "the common good does not exist as something independent and separate from the people who live together, but as something in which they all participate in a way staff, just as they personally contribute to the existence of this good". Each person must subordinate his private good to the common good and in this way does not suffer his dignity staff because "society is for the person" and not the other way round; society is at the service of the human person, i.e. it must facilitate the common good for each of the persons who make it up. The reason why there must be subordination to the common good is precisely that the dignity of all persons must be respected and not just that of a few. The common good has, of course, primacy over the private good, but society must serve all persons.

A cultivated mind, such as the university man may be expected to be, must in principle be more capable of freeing himself from the selfish tendency to seek only the private good; he is better able to appreciate the higher value of the common good, to crave that larger and higher good which is at the same time in some sense good for himself. The university man, who has acquired the intellectual habits, must also be more generous and magnanimous; and more discerning in gauging the extent and gravity of the duties towards the common good, those which justice demands in the individual and social spheres. Nobility, loyalty, the spirit of sacrifice, and so many other human virtues, should shine more brightly in him, precisely because of his greater capacity to appreciate the higher values they embody.

It is reasonable, therefore, that the true university student should take care of so many aspects that make social coexistence more pleasant, friendly and beneficial: respect for others, for their rights, their opinions, their freedom; the attention full of consideration, delicacy, attention; knowing how to listen and making an effort to understand; being open to tastes different from his own, to subjects that interest others; a whole wide range of qualities that are usually attributed to the educated and correct man. staff And he does not act in this way only because it allows a more comfortable coexistence, but because he is convinced of the dignity of those around him, because of the intimate consideration they deserve, because others are not indifferent to him, but are important to him, out of human fraternity.

Social coexistence is not simply the fruit of an extrinsically procured order, nor is it something accepted as a mere and unavoidable form of survival, under an ordering rules and regulations that tries to protect independence and peace, but it has to be willed, it has to be achieved as result of a participative integration of wills, which is also manifested in the interest of one for the other, in the cordial relationship, in the spirit of partnership, in the disposition for work as a team, in the eagerness to complement each other in search of higher common achievements.

When the university student has to give orders or instructions about something, he tends to explain the reasons, to make sure that the reason is understood; he wants to convince. He does not impose himself - Álvaro D'Ors would probably say - by his "potestas" but by his "auctoritas"; he possesses authority, but he is not authoritarian. For this reason, he prefers to rely on others, he wants to know their opinion, he seeks their cooperation. In communication staff he is simple, he does not like distancing or deception.

It is important to ensure that the University constitutes a model of social coexistence, which leaves its mark on all those who pass through it. The atmosphere of personal relationships in the classrooms, in the laboratories, in the corridors, cafeterias or libraries, at work and in recreation, in sports activities or in any other activities, must be a living school for the exercise of the virtues of coexistence, so that these remain vigorous and current later on, once one is definitively inserted in society.

Service mentality

One consequence of possessing a sufficiently high sense of the dignity of the human person is to find satisfaction in helping others, to feel the joy of serving them, to discover this new dimension of human activity which can be defined, in the words of the Founder of the University of Navarre, as a "mentality of service".

It is legitimate to develop one's intelligence, to acquire more culture, to acquire some mastery over nature, to be in a position to act with greater Degree of knowledge, of freedom, of autonomy manager. With all this, there is no doubt that it is possible to live more intensely as a person. These desires are considerably ennobled when this spiritual enrichment makes it possible, on the one hand, to acquire a more radical awareness of what God means to man and, on the other hand, is directed towards a selfless service to others, which contributes to making life more pleasant and society more just and more friendly.

This mentality of service should not be seen simply as something praiseworthy and meritorious, but as an ethical duty, erected by human solidarity and fraternity, which the university student must possess as an element of his or her spirit, which includes various manifestations:

a) Firstly - as something that is basic and that can often serve as a contrast of authenticity - to strive to carry out one's own professional work , the function that one performs within society, as fully as possible, to the best of one's ability. It implies the faithful fulfilment of one's professional duties, the continuous striving to perfect one's knowledge, to improve oneself in the exercise of one's profession, as the primary means of offering society, to others, a good service.

b) Another service, very typical of the university student, and even more so if he is professionally dedicated to the cultivation of a Science, is to make others participants in his knowledge staff, in his scientific findings, or even in the questions he raises in the face of certain issues. And so he tries to publish the results of his work research, so that they become common knowledge, and he gives himself with simple generosity to his students, disciples or collaborators, in an open intellectual submission with multiplying effects.

c) Mention must also be made of the service to society that comes from the possession of social sensitivity, from the keen sense of responsibility in matters of common interest, from the clear awareness that the university student has greater social duties precisely because he or she has greater knowledge and culture, because he or she has been able to acquire a deeper sense of justice.

d) The university student must also be sensitive in order to lend financial aid spiritual and material support to others, to bring them the benefits of culture, so that they may discover their own dignity in greater Degree and know how to act accordingly. In all the environments in which he lives, in the professional, family and social spheres, there are people who need his generosity, his submission to sow the seeds of truth, justice, love and peace.

e) On the other hand, when stultifying currents are perceived in the environment, or when essential human rights are violated, social responsibility prevents silence, passivity or indifference, and calls for appropriate action on the part of the university. There can be no doubt that a university student can do much to awaken others from their lethargy of passivity and that he or she must stimulate initiative in the service of so many generous enterprises for the good of mankind. In the same way, this same responsibility should encourage interest in public affairs and participation in the right shaping of society.

It is clear to no one that a service mentality often requires overcoming comfort and accepting to "complicate one's life" for the good of many. But it is a virtue that is very much in keeping with the true university spirit. Service understood in this way does not demean, it does not enslave, but on the contrary, it teaches and ennobles, for the very reason that it is freely desired and generously practised.

c) University students' responsibilities to society

All these ethical characteristics that contribute to shaping the university spirit must be naturally present in the life of any professional coming from a university, as intellectual habits that inform the most diverse manifestations of their daily work: in the different aspects of their professional dedication, in their behaviour as citizens, in all their relationships in society and in their own life staff and family life. The training acquired means having assimilated a high regard for the dignity of the person and a deep appreciation of the noblest values of man. All this in turn represents a more conscious responsibility towards oneself and others, which stems from a greater clarity of convictions, from the knowledge more plenary session of the Executive Council of reality.

The university student, already inserted in society, must assume this greater responsibility in it: 1) by being consistent with the truth; 2) by exemplarily fulfilling the duties incumbent upon him as a professional and as a man; 3) by contributing as much as possible, with generosity and high mindedness, in favour of justice, respect, understanding and concord among men. This way of behaving is not only required of him by the highest Education that he has had the opportunity to receive, but also as something that society has the right to expect from the university student, since these educational levels, with the special cultivation of intelligence that they entail, are supported to a certain extent by the whole of society so that even if they are only followed by a part of it, they will result in an appreciation of the values of the spirit and scientific and cultural achievements that are of interest to all.