Oh, the Humanities!!!

"...medicine, law, business, engineering, these are noble pursuits and necessary to sustain life. But poetry, beauty, romance, love, these are what we stay alive for."
-John Keating, Dead Poet's Society

I recently read this extraordinarily depressing article from the New York Times describing the state of humanities and liberal arts in higher education and the general decline that is occurring or will occur soon as budget cuts, hiring freezes, and the overall lessening of the value placed upon non-math or science related topics becomes the norm in college curricula across the country. The information in the essay isn't really new. Studies of literature, art, history, philosophy, and other related fields have been declining since at least the early 80s and are especially susceptible to decline during tough economic times and wars - as Arthur Miller wrote during the Vietnam War, "When the guns boom, the arts die." Today is no exception and in many ways our age is an exemplar of this state of affairs. I was advised by a former professor upon informing him of my decision to pursue graduate studies in history to diversify as much as possible and to focus on topics that are "in vogue" in academia. In terms of pre-modern European history, which, as broadly as I can, describes my interests in geographic and chronological terms, that means things like the Crusades, Western/Islamic relations, women and gender, socio-economics, etc. Fortunately for me, I am interested in these things. It also seems likely that getting some type of minor in global studies or world history is in my best interests. Perhaps, as a friend who recently completed a master's program (albeit in a science field) told me recently, I should simply be content with the fact that I am being offered any funding at all in my pursuit of a humanities degree.

Laurie: "...I've decided to major in philosophy."
Eric: "That's good because they just opened up that big philosophy factory in Green Bay."
-That '70s Show

As someone who is about to enter graduate school in history, the state of humanities higher education is obviously troubling to me. I have no doubt that historical studies will continue to be an integral part of the college experience, but the shrinking size of college endowments in general and departments in the arts and humanities in particular have placed something of a "burden of proof" on these departments. This is unfortunate. Professors in these fields are tacitly being told by their administrators and board members that to remain pertinent, they must explain why they are as important as, say, engineering or biology. Well, the truth is, in a practical way, they aren't. Or, I should say, at least not in an obvious way. Knowing the ins and outs of St. Anselm's ontological argument won't help you build a bridge and understanding the mimetic theory of pre-modern literature is not going to put a satellite into orbit. This much is obvious. Teachers in the humanities have been arguing for years, and rightfully so, however, that learning critical thinking skills, argumentative skills, analytical writing and reasoning skills, are extremely important for the overall education of a student. Afterall, how can you convince the federal government to fund your scientific research if you can't coherently argue in writing why it's so important? Or, going beyond that, as the article mentions, how do you weigh the moral implications of stem cell research or recombinant DNA or the human genome project without a firm grounding in the last 3000 years or so of Western history and philosophy? These intellectual quests give us reason to keep building bridges and sending up satellites. Perhaps the future of humanities, or perhaps most academic studies, will be further syntheses of seemingly disparate discourses. If humanities cannot survive on their own, perhaps being married to more scientific fields will help: the history of science and the relationships amongst science, philosophy, theology, and religion seem necessary to fostering better understanding in the future. Humanities professors shouldn't have to "prove" their worth to anyone: one step inside an art museum, one page turned of Shakespeare, one note from Beethoven, should be enough to convince us of the merits of a liberal arts education.

"There are obviously two educations. One should teach us how to make a living and the other how to live. Surely these should never be confused in the mind of any man who has the slightest inkling of what culture is. For most of us it is essential that we should make a living...In the complications of modern life and with our increased accumulation of knowledge, it doubtless helps greatly to compress some years of experience into far fewer years by studying for a particular trace or profession in an institution; but that fact should not blind us to another—namely, that in so doing we are learning a trade or a profession, but are not getting a liberal education as human beings."
-James Truslow Adams