Philosophy is the highest pursuit. All other subjects only function as a gymnasium of the mind in preparation for its study. Isocrates, in the compilation of his life’s work, asserts this plainly and astutely.
Lately however, as noted several times in class, the reputation of the liberal arts has not fared well in the realm of public attention. The rhetoric had shifted yet again to favor the narrow, vocational style of education exhibited in the curricula of colleges like that of Business and Engineering. This debate had been framed so aptly by Cicero in his De Oratore, but seems to be just as relevant today as it was long ago. A few typical phrases uttered by politicians and so-called social commentators:
“Our country is experiencing a severe shortage of engineers and scientists!”
“China and Russia are surpassing us in technological innovation and achievement.”
“What will students do with that major after graduation?”
There are several implications. The United States has a large appetite indeed for those in scientific professions, and it is entirely possible that there is a dearth of individuals to fill vacant positions. This is the case in certain sectors, such as the aerospace industry, where it is estimated that over 50% of the current workforce will be eligible for retirement within 5 years. The implication here is that a surplus of students in the liberal arts is detracting from scientific fields – a claim I find to be fallacious. Generally, there is already an existing net surplus within the fields of science and engineering. This is a situation currently exacerbated by the global economic recession; many engineers who would have otherwise entered the workforce were forced to attend graduate school instead. I see no reason for politicians to continuously spout such alarmist sentiments. Indeed, I am exceedingly baffled by the actions of those who have benefited most from the study of the liberal arts, who yet continue to defame it.
Secondly, it is suggested that the study of liberal arts has hindered the country’s technological progress, again by detracting those who would otherwise be studying the sciences. In response, it must be noted that vocational schools function much like coin mints or assembly lines. You cannot hammer out innovation through a procedural process, lest you desire the resulting graduates to be mere number crunchers. The required ability is cultivated by critical thinking, curiosity, and an indomitable sense of perseverance. Strangely, these are the traits that a curriculum in the liberal arts professes to teach. You will find that an inordinately large number of professors in the scientific fields have an appreciation for history, literature, and the fine arts. This is no coincidence.
Two examples come to mind regarding the above, straight out of various engineering classes. In one instance, a professor interjected into the middle of his lecture: “You can watch me draw symbols on the board all day, but to be human, you must know the humanities.” During another class, a student once complained about the breadth of humanities courses (18 credit hours) we needed to take in addition to engineering courses. The professor replied: “Without those, you’d be ignorant. We don’t tolerate ignorance.” The consensus is clear. All vocational education should be supplemented by a curriculum of liberal arts.
The last inquiry suggests that a liberal arts education is too broad to be practical in any field offered by the real world. This may be true for highly specialized fields, but in general the question is ill-posed and the inquirer presumptuous. What will you do with a liberal arts degree? You will dictate policy, preside as judges of the civil court, and champion the rights of the people. You will declare war on our enemies and preserve ties with our allies. You will allocate funds here and cut budgets there; engineers like myself will write proposals to you, begging you for the funds without which our projects would only wither. Let us not forget, dear students of the liberal arts, that a great majority of the elected leadership in this country had sat in the same seats, walked the same halls, and toted the same books. You will, as they are doing presently, decide what is important to the country. By the virtue of your training, your decisions will shape the future of this world: politically, scientifically, morally.
I have great confidence that you will succeed, armed with the summation of knowledge from those that have preceded you. When you’ve reached such heights, do not forget to credit those that are responsible for your rise, and restore the liberal arts back to its proper eminence. Too many already are preoccupied solely with their own reputations.
Isocrates made no mistake in asserting that philosophy was the culmination of all studies, as its pursuers will eventually preside over all human matters imaginable. After all, we elect leaders who we believe to be capable of arriving at the best course of action on our behalf; such is wisdom. It may not produce results measurable by discrete numbers or human methods of survey, but we should know better than to assume that it produces no results whatsoever.
Linda's Isocratean Reflections 