Yesterday, we dipped into the archives to consider the case for a simplified core curriculum as a way of lessening transfer hassles.

There's been a conference of Deep Thinkers gathered at the University of Chicago who, while concentrating on the latest Crisis of the Humanities, might be considering something similar.  (After you have eliminated the impossible ...)
[Harvard's Julie] Reuben proposed that the aim of a contemporary liberal education should be to orient students to the world they live in and help them both envision and build the lives they want to live. Such an education should be humbling, she added, and include exposure to contradiction and ambiguity.

Reuben also proposed certain core courses that might serve that purpose: one on humans’ impact on the planet, inclusive of cultural and natural and social scientific perspectives; one on the origins and impact of European colonialism across the globe in terms of power, economies and culture; and one organized around the concept of the self, including philosophical, artistic and biological and psychological inquiry. She called her ideas “humble,” but also proof that educators should be “afraid” to begin such conversations.
Ultimately, it's about the proper bag of tricks, the ability to ask the right questions, more bluntly, about having that working jive detector.
[Lafayette College president Alison] Byerly said she begins on common ground: that the pace of change today is rapid. From there, she said, the best argument for a liberal education is one she believes in -- that it’s the “best possible preparation" for change and reinventing oneself.
Put another way, there are intellectual foundations to intellectual inquiry, whether that inquiry leads in a theoretical or practical direction matters not.  On the other hand, a foundationless inquiry is not likely to be fruitful.

No comments: