Conservatives are fools to send their own children to Leftist indoctrination camps known as “universities,” and actually pay for the destruction of their children’s minds and debauchery of their morals, typically with the hope that they will recover from this sometime later. Increasingly, conservatives themselves are coming to understand this. Arthur Milikh, of the Heritage Foundation, is not a fringey nutjob — but he now calls our universities “Suicide By Higher Education.” These are strong words. These institutions are too far gone. They will never be fixed. It is like trying to replace every part in a used, worn-out automobile. Forget it — just buy a new car.
I admit there is yet some cachet to the top 20 universities or so. This is due mostly to their competitive admissions procedures, which really does select for highly able students, rather than for anything that happens at the university itself. But for the rest of the hundreds of universities and colleges around these days, they do not have much special cachet, and are largely interchangeable.
Let’s say those 30% of parents and their children that are strongly Conservative-leaning decide to do something else, and go somewhere else. This would do two things: first, many of these corrupt Leftist institutions would collapse due to a lack of revenue. This would actually free up resources and force positive change upon the institution. For the most desirable universities, they are likely to have all the students they want. If they admit one out of five applicants, instead of one out of ten, it won’t change their business much. Plus, they tend to have large endowments.
But in this case, they would be left with an even more Left-leaning student body and faculty. They would likely slide from A Little Crazy to full-on Crazytown, somewhat like Evergreen State College did recently. This would drive out moderates, and the resulting decline in reputation might push even these institutions toward reform.
That is not really our goal here. Our goal is to construct viable alternatives.
“Higher education” in the U.S. is rather bloated as it is. Probably, a number of students that have tended to be channeled toward four-year degrees would be better off with vocational training of one sort or another.
To this we can add vocational training that is now taking place at supposedly “liberal arts” universities. This includes all math and science, engineering, pre-med, computer science, and basically anything you might find at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. This is essentially vocational training, although at a high level.
We then add training in fields such as accounting, hotel management, marketing or nursing — all good and worthwhile things, which can be categorized as vocational training. This can be finished in a year or two, without asking students to kick around for an additional two years of disorganized, low-value general education.
We are then left with what has been traditionally known as the “liberal arts.” These are subjects which are, in essence, not vocational training — although they have been found to serve, indirectly, as excellent training for a number of vocations, typically higher-level corporate management, business and law.
I will focus here only on “liberal arts,” leaving vocational training aside although it will be an important part of any educational system. “Liberal arts” graduates inevitably also receive vocational training, typically after their liberal arts training, either on the job or perhaps at a graduate school of law or business. So, it is never a matter of “Vocational or Liberal Arts,” but a question of “Vocational, or Liberal Arts and Vocational.” Probably, not more than 10% or so of all students would likely undertake the kind of intensive study that I propose here — or should. In the past, it was well under 10%.
In the past, people who did not receive a formal Liberal Arts education nevertheless did much to educate themselves. Before the higher education boom beginning around 1950, many an American family would make a living on the farm or in the factory, and then return home to read Shakespeare and Plutarch. Read the Autobiography of Benjamin Franklin for a good example of this tradition of self-education.
I will use the traditional term “Liberal Arts,” which has been around since the Greek days. “Liberal” comes from “liber,” which refers to the tree bark upon which things were written in Ancient Greece. From it we get “liberty” and “library.”
You have been wishing to know my views with regard to liberal studies. My answer is this: I respect no study, and deem no study good, which results in money-making … they are our apprenticeship, not our real work. Hence you see why ‘liberal studies’ are so called; it is because they are studies worthy of a free-born gentleman. But there is only one really liberal study – that which gives a man his liberty. It is the study of wisdom, and that is lofty, brave, and great-souled.
Roman philosopher Seneca (4 B.C.–65 A.D.)
[L]iberal education…is the education that prepares us to be free men. You have to have this education if you … are going to be an effective citizen of a democracy; for citizenship requires that…you do not leave your duties to be performed by others … A free society is composed of freemen. To be free you have to be educated for freedom.
Robert M. Hutchins, president of the University of Chicago (1929-1945)
The utilitarian or servile arts enable one to be a servant — of another person, of the state, of a corporation, or of a business — and to earn a living. The liberal arts, in contrast, teach one how to live; they train the faculties and bring them to perfection; they enable a person to rise above his material environment to live an intellectual, a rational, and therefore a free life in gaining truth.
Sister Mary Joseph, The Trivium: the Liberal Arts of Logic, Grammar and Rhetoric (1948)
Consider education not as the painful accumulation of facts and dates and reigns, nor merely the necessary preparation of the individual to earn his keep in the world, but as the transmission of our mental, moral, technical, and aesthetic heritage as fully as possible to as many as possible, for the enlargement of man’s understanding, control, embellishment, and enjoyment of life. …
If a man is fortunate he will, before he dies, gather up as much as he can of his civilized heritage and transmit it to his children. And to his final breath he will be grateful for this inexhaustible legacy, knowing that it is our nourishing mother and our lasting life.
Will Durant, The Lessons of History (1968)
In practice, this “Liberal Arts” refers to things like: History, Government, Literature, Philosophy, Performing and Fine Arts.
In the medieval period, the Liberal Arts were separated into the “Trivium” and the “Quadrivium.” The “Quadrivium” was: Arithmetic, Geometry, Music and Astronomy. Hey, it was the Middle Ages. Today, this basically means: Math and Science. A well-educated person today should have some familiarity with Math and Science. Most students get this at the high-school level, with a math course up through early Calculus, and experience with Chemistry, Biology and Physics. But, any deficiencies that may be considered an important part of a Liberal Arts education can also be included.
The Trivium was: Grammar, Logic, Rhetoric.
“Huh?” you say. Let me explain what this means:
Grammar: Can you understand what the author is saying?
Logic: Can you analyze the author’s arguments?
Rhetoric: Can you formulate your own thoughts and arguments, and express them in an effective way?
Makes more sense now, doesn’t it. Most “liberal arts” college students today fail in these basic skills — and fail badly. Most young people today seem to be trained to become irrational squealing nincompoops.
So far, we have defined the “Liberal Arts” merely as things of a non-vocational nature, that we think are of value. It is pretty vague.
In the past, before 1890 or so, this “Liberal Arts” education typically consisted of mastery of Greek and Latin, followed by reading some important works in the original Greek and Latin.
This probably strikes us as rather bizarre today. But, this training created incredible intellects. This is the kind of education that the Founding Fathers had, and it would be difficult today, even among a population of 330 million, to find such an extraordinary group of minds.
But, the important thing is that this education consists of things that we value, and also, the study of which tends to create the expansion of mind and improvement of mental skills that we value.
It is not a free-for-all of moral relativism. We may value open discussion, and that can be part of the training. But, it is not anything and everything, because we don’t want to make any decisions about what is valuable and what is not. Chinese people would probably value the Confucian Classics — and for good reason. We probably don’t care much for these, but we might value the Federalist Papers. We don’t leave it up to the students to figure out for themselves.
Anyone reading this blog probably has broad experience in reading and studying different topics. Probably, there are things that they found were of value. Maybe it is: Adios America, by Ann Coulter; The Adventures of Augie March, by Saul Bellow; Lincoln, by David Herbert Donald; and The Seven Spiritual Laws of Success, by Deepak Chopra. In short, it is the things that you know of, of such value and importance, that you wish your children to also read and study them. We call these Great Books; which means, much better than average books.
Let us set aside then, four years for the education of our young adult children. What Things of Value shall we put into these four years? It seems like a long time, but this space tends to get filled quite quickly. Before long, you find that you have to leave out many, many things simply because there is no room for it.
Basically, it is about 200 books. This seems like a big number, but since this is a “general” education, of breadth rather than specialization, this can be spread among a wide variety of topics. The amount of time or focus spent on any one topic can be rather brief.
Here, you will discover the value of a “liberal arts education.” It consists of Things That You Value. How could that not be valuable? It will become important for you that your children take some time to study them in detail.
I will continue with this discussion later. For now, try making a list of the things that you would like to have in the education of your children. In time, you will form a vision. The college education you imagine will be Definitely This and Definitely Not That. It is not a vague and aimless hodgepodge of mediocrity, which only seems tolerable because we have no standard against which to measure it. Probably, the Definitely Not That part is not too hard to do these days.
