In his analysis of Roth\u2019s book, Altschuler states that \u201cRoth does not specify how liberal learning might \u2018pull different skills together in project-oriented classes.\u2019 Nor does he adequately address \u2018the new sort of criticism\u2019 directed at liberal learning. A liberal arts education, many critics now claim, does not really prepare students to love virtue, be good citizens, or recognize competence in any field.\u00a0 As Roth acknowledges, general education, distribution requirements, and free electives are not effective antidotes to specialization; they have failed to help establish common academic goals for students.\u00a0 And, perhaps most disturbingly, doubt has now been cast on the proposition that the liberal arts are the best, and perhaps the only, pathway to \u2018critical thinking\u2019 (the disciplined practice of analyzing, synthesizing, applying, and evaluating information).\u201d<\/p>\n
Against this critique, a number of defenses of the liberal arts have also appeared recently. The NY Times\u2019 David Brooks, a member of the aforementioned commission, has defended the value of the humanities in pieces which range from explicit advocacy (\u201cThe Humanist Vocation\u201d<\/a>) to subtle leitmotif (\u201cLove Story<\/a>\u201d). Elizabeth Corey (Baylor) has also written an excellent piece in First Things<\/em> (\u201cLearning in Love<\/a>\u201d) which emphasizes the affective dimension of a liberal arts education both in relation to the material being studied and the guide (professor) one encounters. \u201cI am convinced,\u201d Corey writes, \u201cthat the personal element in liberal learning cannot be valued highly enough.\u201d<\/p>\n Apropos of this debate, I am currently reading \u2013 in free time which I do not possess \u2013 a book which recounts a seasoned writer\u2019s adventure of going back to school and re-reading the classic canon of Western Literature by taking two Humanities classes at Columbia University (David Denby\u2019s Great Books<\/em>). Almost immediately, in the first chapter of this book, the author senses a conflict, a conflict which emerges over how<\/em> to read these texts. On the one hand, one can read them from an intellectualist<\/em> perspective; i.e., these texts do indeed form an intellectual canon and in order to be an \u201ceducated person\u201d one has to be familiar with the words and thoughts of these \u201cwise men.\u201d On the other hand, one can read these texts from a post-modern<\/em> perspective; i.e., these texts form a canon because people with the power to establish a literary canon have said \u201clet it be\u201d and it has been so. There is no greater or lesser value to these texts written by dead white males than any other texts, but one should be familiar with them \u2013 if for no other reason \u2013 than they have shaped the culture in which we now live.<\/p>\n There is, however, a third way of understanding education, and liberal education in particular.<\/p>\n In a lecture originally delivered to the Buenos Aires-based Christian Association of Businesspeople<\/em> (\u201cEducating in the Context of Culture\u201d), Pope Francis proposes a vision for education \u201cin which the fundamentals remain, and which remains foundational. Truth, beauty, and goodness exist. The absolute exists. It can, or rather, it should be known and perceived.\u201d In other words, at the heart of liberal education is the pursuit of transcendental realities. A truly liberal education strives to lead the student towards his\/her fulfillment by fostering a desire and capacity to attain perfections which cannot be divorced from their source. The third way of liberal education, therefore, is an ordering of the human person towards the transcendent.<\/p>\n A \u2018liberal education\u2019 means, quite literally, \u2018to lead out\u2019 (educere<\/em>) to \u2018freedom\u2019 (libertas<\/em>); not a freedom which is simply the multiplication of choices, but a freedom which allows one to pursue excellence. Those of us who are fortunate to teach from within the context of a Catholic education ought to be mindful of this great gift. The gift of being able to share, with our students, this journey towards authentic freedom and the transcendent source of all virtues.<\/p>\n Anthony Coleman<\/strong> teaches theology for Saint Joseph’s College Online.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" Several critiques and defenses of the value of a liberal arts education have found their way to my desk and computer screen in recent days. First is the 2013 report composed by the Commission on the Humanities and Social … Continue reading ![\"WIndow\"](\"https:\/\/blogs.sjcme.edu\/theology\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/10\/2014\/03\/window-300x199.jpg\")
<\/a>It is increasingly apparent today that universities without fidelity to an expressly Christian mission simply cannot provide this foundation. They are caught up, as the above author demonstrates, with either an intellectualist or post-modern perspective towards liberal education. At Catholic colleges and universities we have the privilege of building upon the foundation about which Pope Francis speaks. Preparing students to pursue virtue, to seek wisdom, and to love beauty can only take place from within a context which acknowledges their existence. If virtue, wisdom and beauty are merely ideas, then they are no more inherently worthy of pursuit \u2013 and perhaps far less so \u2013 than an economically rewarding career, the esteem of one\u2019s peers, and the immediate satisfaction of one\u2019s appetites.<\/p>\n