‘Sir, just a question please’

“Hi, I have a question. I don’t think that the principle of explosion should exist.”

This is the most enjoyable question that I have yet received as a Student Assistant. And it’s actually not even a question. I once again have the honour of being a Student Assistant this year, something I have greatly enjoyed doing since my second academic year.

Many courses have Student Assistants and they are the first point of contact between students and teachers. The role varies of course, but Student Assistants usually help with answering questions, arranging lesson materials, or with the administration. In the big courses where more than 500 students battle it out with two teachers, Student Assistants are crucial in maintaining some kind of personal contact.

You learn to teach as a Student Assistant. You learn how you can bring the subject across clearly and carefully, and you get to know the material better and better. It is the purest way of practising the Feynman Technique – learning something by explaining it to someone – and you even get paid. This may not be the absolute truth, but I believe that I was not a Student Assistant in the subjects that I am best at. The subjects for which I was a Student Assistant became those that I became good at.

Helping students overcome obstacles forces you to improve your communications skills. You learn to remain clear, calm and empathetic while helping someone who is stuck without imposing your own solution.

I recommend everyone to take on a Student Assistant job

Student Assistants also build a huge network. You get to know fellow students – now colleagues – outside of your own year, older students, teachers, and professors who can help you choose your own studies and overcome obstacles.

For all these reasons, a job as a student assistant is something I would wish for everyone.

Back to my favourite non-question. The explosion principle is a rule of logic that means that ‘any statement can be proven from a contradiction’. I will spare you the details. For now, it is enough to know that the rule is counterintuitive for many people who come across it for the first time.

The question ticks all the boxes.

First, the answer is not trivial, as in the ‘do we need to know “Dijkstra” for the exam?’ question. Second, the question is a challenge. It is not immediately apparent what the student does not fully understand, so you need to discuss this before you start giving an answer. And lastly, the question has a strong knock-on effect. If the student understands it, a lot of other things fall into place.

We talked about this question for more than 20 minutes, covering the principle of explosion, the basic rules of logic, and the consequences of these in the real world. The student ended the discussion by saying: “Thank you, I think you may be right.”