"Three wise men" sat down at the first Law School Summer on the Civil Rights movement Monday night to discuss the , directions, and goals of the civil rights movement.

The result appeared to be a clash of ideas rather than a meet- minds among Kenneth Clark, professor of psychology at Oscar Handlin, Winthrop professor of History and Charles man, author of Crisis in Black and White.

Handlin, the opening speaker, said that the problems of the in urban centers are analagous to those of immigrant groups. They are intensified by the problem of Negro identity, but essential similar to those of white migrants who made the same transition.

He divided the problems of the movement into two categories, of personal security and equal rights, and those of a social - poverty, underemployment, inadequate housing and education, and disruption of family life.

A Second Choice

In the realm of social problems he said, "the formula of integration and desegregation is inadequate." The issue of integration in the sense of a racially homogeneous restructuring of the community is "irrelevant," he continued. Rather, the movement should strive for a second, more realistic situation "in which the individual has the opportunity to make the choices he wishes."

In such a social order, "voluntary ghettos can exist, schools are not necessarily racially balanced, and there exists and occupational culture reflecting interests and attitudes in a diversified society." Handlin asserted.

Asking Handlin to "please note these arguments are directed at you." Silberman denied the thesis that the problems of the Negro are the same as those of other minorities and will he solved by a long process of acculteration.

"No matter how accultered he becomes," said the associate editor of Fortune, "the Negro remains and alien in his won land...different because he is black."

Negro Excluded

"American society is a racial society to a degree which we are just beginning to realize," he continued, saying, "Myrdal is wrong-the American Creed never intended to include the Negro.

"What Negroes want more than anything else is to be treated as men," Silberman asserted, explaining, "Negro-white relations have always been structured in a patron-servant, father-child relation."

Silberman concluded that the realistic goal of the movement must be the acquisition of power by the Negro. "Power, not integrated lunch counters, schools, or equal or preferential treatment is what they want."

Clark began his talk by saying that it was symbolic that he, a Negro, should be speaking last and be deprived of some of his speaking time. Thereupon, Mark DeWolfe Howe, professor of Law, broke in with the reminder that "everyone has equal time."

"Equal verbally," Clark answered enigmatically.

He noted that although tremendous strides have been made in civil rights in the past decade ("What seemed impossible 10 years ago and barely possible three years ago has abruptly happened") "it is obvious that something is missing."

The future of the movement cannot, he said, be understood by looking at the movement itself. "We are at a point where the major confrontation is of white versus white," he said.

"The civil rights movement has realized the stage where average whites are being asked to carry part of the burden of transforming the nation into minimal integrity required for survival at this stage in history. The question is whether the patient is so weakened that it does not have the adaptive strength to come to grips with the real problems," Clark said.

He suggested that the people of America could not be affected by moral arguments, but rather must be appealed to "in terms of the mores of American whites and Negroes whose moral sensitivity has been eroded by the cancer of racism.