Many people would go so far as to say that a professor's job is to provide knowledge to students, and a student's job is to absorb it, without reservation. Pirsig highlights how this relationship can fail through his description of Phaedrus' time in the interdisciplinary doctorate. program at the University of Chicago. A student in Phaedrus' philosophy class questions Aristotle's rhetorical vision by stating that within the text, "'There are some dubious statements,'" and the professor responds, "'We are not here to learn what you think. . We are here to learn what Aristotle thinks,'” (Pirsig 371). Essentially, Pirsig says there is a problem with the conventional professor-student relationship because when a professor begins to feel vulnerable, as in the situation above , transforms into a sovereign leader. When students live under an oppressive regime in the classroom, they find themselves unable to learn on their own terms. I agree that this relationship needs to change, a point that needs to be made as many believe that if the system has worked for so long, it can continue to work. I think Phaedrus is wrong because he overlooks the real reason why the student is struggling with the professor Professor stated individually. Instead, to make more use of knowledge, John Henry Newman would argue that these students should work with others. This will allow them to “piece together the claims and reports of their subjects of investigation” (Newman 77). Newman would certainly extend the same argument that collaboration must occur between opinions on a given topic, like Aristotle. The adjustment of demands, which Newman talks about, improves education for the student. They