"One should linger upon them only so long as the mind can occupy itself with nothing greater; 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. All other studies are puny and puerile.
"You surely do not believe that there is good in any of the subjects whose teachers are, as you see, men of the most ignoble and base stamp? We ought not to be learning such things; we should have done with learning them."
--Seneca the Younger, Moral Letters to Lucilius, 88 (tr Gummere)
I hardly have the aptitude or inclination to speak with any authority on the politics, law, economics, demographics, or administration of education. But I have, in one form or another, been immersed in the task of teaching for over two decades, and I have a special vocation for understanding the philosophy of education. This doesn't just consider questions of curriculum, assessment, or the efficiency of the various means of learning available to us. It also asks, more fundamentally, what the ultimate end of study should be, and how that purpose relates to our human nature.
What Seneca has to say in Letter 88 will hardly be popular in the current climate, and I find that his argument will often cause great animosity, but I only ask that we consider our differences in light of that most basic of questions: why are we here, and how can learning assist us toward that goal? We can only proceed when this has been answered rightly.
I have now heard most every politician, on either side of the political aisle, tell us that we need to increase our support of education. The phrases and slogans change, but the attitude remains much the same. If we improve educational opportunities, we will improve the skills and abilities of the population. This, in turn, will land them good jobs, better salaries, greater security, and thereby also benefit the economy as a whole.
That greater skills can lead us to greater worldly prosperity should be apparent enough. But is such a prosperity itself the measure by which we should define ourselves? President after President, Senator after Senator, and Governor after Governor insist that it's all about the jobs. Jobs do indeed matter, but is that all there is, and is that the most important standard by which we define human success?
Shall I see myself only as a creature made for productivity and efficiency, homo faber, or shall I understand myself also as a creature made for knowing and loving, homo sapiens? Seneca clearly asks us to subsume the lower under the higher, in that any of the circumstances of our careers, possessions, or our status should only be valued as a means to our fuller purpose, the pursuit of wisdom and virtue.
In the simplest sense, I might ask: where's the 'profit'? What is the genuine benefit? As soon as I fix the measure of man's end, from the exterior to the interior, from the goods of the body alone to a body ruled by a a good soul, from wealth and power to truth and character, I am readjusting anything and everything that matters.
This is then also certainly true in my judgments about education. It can't just be about a good job, or greater security, or economic productivity. I cannot claim to to think or live like a Stoic while failing to order all things toward the life of genuine happiness.
So when Seneca says that education should never be about making money, we may feel offended by such a shocking and unusual claim, or we may laugh at such a 'head in the clouds' philosophy. Please remember that it will only be our estimation of the true dignity of the person that will inform us as to how odd or unrealistic it may rightly be.
Note that Seneca does not discard those trades and careers concerned with worldly profit, but rather says that they are merely a preparation for better things. The problem isn't taking those first steps, but not moving upward and onward any further, much like being trapped in a life of permanent apprenticeship.
I may learn to tie my shoes, but this is of little help if I don't also learn how to walk. I may learn the skills of being a doctor, lawyer, accountant, or teacher, but none of that will be of any use if I don't also learn to use those skills as a wise and decent man. The means must be ordered to the end.
The Ancients and Medievals often spoke of the 'Liberal Arts' or 'Liberal Studies' as a model for educating a truly 'free' person. We will still use these terms nowadays, though usually without that same clarity of meaning. The specifics need not concern us right now, but those teeth have often lost their bite.
So what does it mean to have real liberty, to be truly free? Shall I define them through economics and politics? Is that enough to define my fullness as a human being? Or should I, perhaps, define my liberty not by those things that bind me or do not bind me from without, but rather by what binds me or does not bind me from within?
Education should help me to live well, and to live well is to live with freedom. So what can education do to help me be free? The 'Stoic Turn' reminds us that what gives us real happiness and real liberty is to be able to rule ourselves, and to rule ourselves is to be able to think and act with virtue, regardless of our circumstances.
Education isn't going to help me that much if it teaches me how to become rich, but it will help me greatly if it teaches me how to live with excellence, whether or not I am rich or poor. With Seneca I choose to think of myself as good, and as free, when I can act with wisdom, courage, temperance, and justice.
Let us observe our own teachers. Do their practices live up to their words? Are they helping us to be better men and women who can think for ourselves, the only measure of life that matters, or are they, in the words of George Carlin, just training us "to run the machines and do the paperwork?"
To be continued. . .
Written 1/2010
No comments:
Post a Comment