I think Agnes knows the value of a humanistic education lies in the very inquisitiveness she says prevents her from affirming its value.
And, I think she knows a humanities professor is not the same thing as a humanist. In my view, it's the non-humanist humanities teachers— there are more than a few —who create public confusion about the intrinsic value of a humanistic education.
So: challenge accepted. I'm going to continue to defend the humanities, humanistically and non-defensively. In the current hyper-politicized climate that emboldens benighted legislators to chop them, they need and deserve such support from those of us who value the enhanced possibilities for living they sponsor. There may just be a chance of success.
Humanist William James said it best: nothing is more characteristic of human nature than its willingness to live on a chance.
https://www.nytimes.com/2023/12/02/opinion/education-humanities-college-value.html?smid=nytcore-ios-share&referringSource=articleShare
I Teach the Humanities, and I Still Don't Know What Their Value Is
==
LETTERS
Why the Humanities Are Indeed Worth Teaching
Readers respond to a guest essay by a philosophy professor about difficulties defending the humanities.
Dec. 30, 2023, 11:00 a.m. ET
To the Editor:
Re “I Teach the Humanities. I Still Don’t Know What Their Value Is,” by Agnes Callard (Opinion guest essay, Dec. 3):
As a fellow humanist, I understand Dr. Callard’s desire to avoid conventional pieties and, in the spirit of ongoing inquiry, to claim not to know the value of humanities disciplines. But it is still dispiriting to read this essay with the fear that only humanities undergraduates — well schooled in the reading of subtle texts — will understand the irony in hers.
As one who taught in an English department for almost three decades and went on to be the head of a rare book library, I do know the value of the humanities. Right-thinking humanists do not claim to make their students better people or even try to do so. Such a claim smacks of egotism and hubris. But we do claim to make students better critical readers, thinkers and writers — people better equipped as a result of studying complex texts to judge competing claims, to weigh evidence and to make better-informed judgments on a host of issues.
We humanists are the keepers and interpreters of our civilization, defined globally, and we are charged by tradition and consensus to evaluate that civilization in our teaching and scholarship. This is, of course, itself a conventional piety — but like many conventional pieties, it is a true one.
Because we have done so in the face of growing indifference and shrinking support, it is simply not helpful to have an academic colleague proclaim, even ironically, that she does not know the value of the humanities.
Gail Kern Paster
Washington
The writer is director emerita of the Folger Shakespeare Library.
To the Editor:
The debate over the value of humanities courses is really a question of value for money — especially when college costs so much. But it’s worth remembering the skills that humanities courses give us.
First: curiosity. None of us know exactly where we are heading; we can shape the journey if we are curious about the unknown. Humanities courses teach us to be flexible and make us question our assumptions.
Second: the power of example. Works of art and literature link our current concerns to those of others. They show us the frightening power of a secret shared, of misplaced trust, of leadership forged by challenges. History is a lively tale of tough decisions, of choices and their consequences.
Third: communication. Google Translate may make language classes seem unnecessary. But learning another language gives you a deeper understanding of what others value. And the art of debate is a skill we all need.
When I went to university, I saw my humanities courses as a foundation. It turns out they were a staircase. I could find and change careers, thrive in my choice and lead in a crisis.
I use my “useless” knowledge all the time. An elected leader in Germany once asked me about globalization and its consequences in America. I found myself talking about the power of community, the role of local government and the consequences of job loss. I cited work by an American playwright to underscore my point. In German.
Turns out, those humanities courses were useful after all.
Robin Quinville
Arlington, Va.
The writer is a former diplomat.
To the Editor:
As an academic scientist, I eagerly read Agnes Callard’s thought-provoking essay. It is simply not true that “scientists are under a lot less pressure to explain why they exist.” While society understands that science in general is useful, individual researchers are under great pressure to justify the applicability of their work in order to obtain funding to support it.
Moreover, most academics, whether scientists or humanists, work at universities that center teaching rather than research. In teaching universities, the number of students who major, minor or take courses in a given discipline is the primary determinant of a discipline’s value. Since the majority of students do not major in a science discipline, most scientists will need to justify why they exist.
David Snyder
Queens
The writer is a chemistry professor at William Paterson University but is expressing his own views.
To the Editor:
In her guest essay, a humanities professor, Agnes Callard, conceded, “I do not know what the value of the humanities is.”
As a psychologist, I rely daily on the many lessons of my various humanities classes. A psychologist’s only tool to help people remediate their symptoms, reform their lives and stave off suicide is words. My education in the humanities has helped me, more than anything else, to pick the right words to treat my patients’ “dis-ease” as effectively as possible.
The bane of existence for most educators is that they rarely get to harvest the fruits of their labor, and in this way Dr. Callard’s despondence is understandable. However, I hope she and others who teach the humanities can take solace in knowing their efforts contribute, albeit indirectly, to the healing of many — one word at a time.
John G. Cottone
Stony Brook, N.Y.
To the Editor:
I was a high school history teacher for more than 30 years, I taught what used to be called Western Civ, as well as U.S. history, women’s history, African American Voices and geography. The whole gamut. Yes, I loved what I taught. But sharing that love was not my motivation.
My students have become engineers, doctors, moms, software creators and leaders of nonprofits of various sorts. They may well have forgotten that they have read Mary Wollstonecraft, Frederick Douglass or Nietzsche. But they still retained the habits of critical reading, clear writing, thorough research and thoughtful deliberation. Many of them found solace and inspiration in the historical figures they encountered. Some found vocations in the movements they studied.
Like Agnes Callard, I have no need to defend the humanities one author or one discipline at a time. But when schools stop teaching humanities courses, students lose more than just education in social values and cultural literacy. They lose valuable life skills that sustain them regardless of their future paths.
Liz Zucker
Cambridge, Mass.
LETTERS
Why the Humanities Are Indeed Worth Teaching
Readers respond to a guest essay by a philosophy professor about difficulties defending the humanities.
Dec. 30, 2023, 11:00 a.m. ET
To the Editor:
Re “I Teach the Humanities. I Still Don’t Know What Their Value Is,” by Agnes Callard (Opinion guest essay, Dec. 3):
As a fellow humanist, I understand Dr. Callard’s desire to avoid conventional pieties and, in the spirit of ongoing inquiry, to claim not to know the value of humanities disciplines. But it is still dispiriting to read this essay with the fear that only humanities undergraduates — well schooled in the reading of subtle texts — will understand the irony in hers.
As one who taught in an English department for almost three decades and went on to be the head of a rare book library, I do know the value of the humanities. Right-thinking humanists do not claim to make their students better people or even try to do so. Such a claim smacks of egotism and hubris. But we do claim to make students better critical readers, thinkers and writers — people better equipped as a result of studying complex texts to judge competing claims, to weigh evidence and to make better-informed judgments on a host of issues.
We humanists are the keepers and interpreters of our civilization, defined globally, and we are charged by tradition and consensus to evaluate that civilization in our teaching and scholarship. This is, of course, itself a conventional piety — but like many conventional pieties, it is a true one.
Because we have done so in the face of growing indifference and shrinking support, it is simply not helpful to have an academic colleague proclaim, even ironically, that she does not know the value of the humanities.
Gail Kern Paster
Washington
The writer is director emerita of the Folger Shakespeare Library.
To the Editor:
The debate over the value of humanities courses is really a question of value for money — especially when college costs so much. But it’s worth remembering the skills that humanities courses give us.
First: curiosity. None of us know exactly where we are heading; we can shape the journey if we are curious about the unknown. Humanities courses teach us to be flexible and make us question our assumptions.
Second: the power of example. Works of art and literature link our current concerns to those of others. They show us the frightening power of a secret shared, of misplaced trust, of leadership forged by challenges. History is a lively tale of tough decisions, of choices and their consequences.
Third: communication. Google Translate may make language classes seem unnecessary. But learning another language gives you a deeper understanding of what others value. And the art of debate is a skill we all need.
When I went to university, I saw my humanities courses as a foundation. It turns out they were a staircase. I could find and change careers, thrive in my choice and lead in a crisis.
I use my “useless” knowledge all the time. An elected leader in Germany once asked me about globalization and its consequences in America. I found myself talking about the power of community, the role of local government and the consequences of job loss. I cited work by an American playwright to underscore my point. In German.
Turns out, those humanities courses were useful after all.
Robin Quinville
Arlington, Va.
The writer is a former diplomat.
To the Editor:
As an academic scientist, I eagerly read Agnes Callard’s thought-provoking essay. It is simply not true that “scientists are under a lot less pressure to explain why they exist.” While society understands that science in general is useful, individual researchers are under great pressure to justify the applicability of their work in order to obtain funding to support it.
Moreover, most academics, whether scientists or humanists, work at universities that center teaching rather than research. In teaching universities, the number of students who major, minor or take courses in a given discipline is the primary determinant of a discipline’s value. Since the majority of students do not major in a science discipline, most scientists will need to justify why they exist.
David Snyder
Queens
The writer is a chemistry professor at William Paterson University but is expressing his own views.
To the Editor:
In her guest essay, a humanities professor, Agnes Callard, conceded, “I do not know what the value of the humanities is.”
As a psychologist, I rely daily on the many lessons of my various humanities classes. A psychologist’s only tool to help people remediate their symptoms, reform their lives and stave off suicide is words. My education in the humanities has helped me, more than anything else, to pick the right words to treat my patients’ “dis-ease” as effectively as possible.
The bane of existence for most educators is that they rarely get to harvest the fruits of their labor, and in this way Dr. Callard’s despondence is understandable. However, I hope she and others who teach the humanities can take solace in knowing their efforts contribute, albeit indirectly, to the healing of many — one word at a time.
John G. Cottone
Stony Brook, N.Y.
To the Editor:
I was a high school history teacher for more than 30 years, I taught what used to be called Western Civ, as well as U.S. history, women’s history, African American Voices and geography. The whole gamut. Yes, I loved what I taught. But sharing that love was not my motivation.
My students have become engineers, doctors, moms, software creators and leaders of nonprofits of various sorts. They may well have forgotten that they have read Mary Wollstonecraft, Frederick Douglass or Nietzsche. But they still retained the habits of critical reading, clear writing, thorough research and thoughtful deliberation. Many of them found solace and inspiration in the historical figures they encountered. Some found vocations in the movements they studied.
Like Agnes Callard, I have no need to defend the humanities one author or one discipline at a time. But when schools stop teaching humanities courses, students lose more than just education in social values and cultural literacy. They lose valuable life skills that sustain them regardless of their future paths.
Liz Zucker
Cambridge, Mass.
No comments:
Post a Comment