Jewish World Review March 20, 2000/ 13 Adar II, 5760
Pointy-eared quadrupeds on campus
THERE'S A QUIET and under-reported war raging in American universities. There's no shooting, no air
strikes and no naval bombarding. But perhaps not since 19th century England have science and
technology on the one hand and liberal arts on the other been so ferociously at each other's throats.
Though the scientists probably wouldn't, you could call it a battle for the soul of education. It pits the
interests of corporate money, the need for tangible results in scientific research and training for jobs
in high-tech industries, against the study of what Matthew Arnold described as the best that is
known and thought in the world.
Eyal Press and Jennifer Washburn offer several examples in dispatches from the front, filed in the
The professors argue that these changes have created "Market-Model Universities,'' which put an
emphasis on subjects designed to make money, study money and attract money. This has not
developed in a vacuum. Many students and tenured professors have trivialized higher education by
reducing the Western studies curriculum to such feel-good scams as "multicultural studies,'' and the
status of the humanities inevitably declines.
George Mason University (GMU) in suburban Virginia got a mandate from the governor to serve
the region's high tech businesses better, with the promise of as much as $25 million a year in
additional state money. The campus in Prince William County added degree courses in information
technology and computer science. Nothing wrong with that -- except that to do it GMU eliminated
degree programs in the classics, German, Russian and other subjects in the humanities. Students and
professors protested, worrying out loud how effective the science courses could be if the students in
them couldn't think and write critically.
At the Claremont colleges in Southern California, a cluster of small schools including
much-respected Pomona College, a new graduate institute features "a curriculum focused on the
needs of the industrial sector.''
In a two-year national study of the humanities, James Engell, a professor from Harvard who
chaired steering committees in literature and history, and Anthony Dangerfield, a former professor of
English at Dartmouth, found that bachelor's degrees in English, foreign languages, philosophy and
religion had sharply declined. They found a five- to ten-fold increase in trade-school courses such as
computer and information sciences. Doctoral programs in literature at the elite universities have 29
fewer students per program than 25 years ago.
When African American studies get an imprimatur that
once belonged to the classics, when "gender studies'' transform "seminars'' into "ovulars,'' and
when the films of Woody Allen, Spike Lee and Martin Scorsese are offered at Yale as a method of
studying "race, ethnicity, religion, gender and sexuality'' in American urban life, you could conclude
that academics ain't what they used to be.
We shouldn't underestimate the importance of learning the language of computers and understanding
the significant changes taking place in the biosciences. But to give short shrift to the humanities is to
diminish our ability to understand man's creative achievements (and failures) in the philosophical and
aesthetic content of the culture.
You don't have to be a romantic to acknowledge that scientific knowledge is narrow, incomplete
and often misleading in the study of man. A fascinating debate between Thomas Huxley, the leading
proponent of Darwin, and his friend Matthew Arnold in the 19th century, illuminates just this point.
Huxley was asked to give the inaugural address on "Science and Culture'' at England's Science
College of Birmingham, whose founder had made one stipulation: "The classics may not be taught.''
Huxley, a brilliant debater, made the strong case for the Darwinian outlook and the exclusive study
of science in education, downgrading and dismissing the classics as dusty tomes written in dead
languages for a few old professors who live to write reviews of other people's books.
Arnold responded with great humility. He would never exclude science from his university, and the
scientists could debate at length Darwin's claim that early man was a hairy quadruped with pointy
ears and a tail, swinging through the trees. Nevertheless, he said wryly, if Darwin was right, there
was something in that pointy-eared quadruped that ultimately moved him forward to write "The
Iliad,'' to build the Acropolis, to dramatize "Oedipus Rex.''
"Matthew Arnold knew we didn't get there on the wings of science,'' says Daniel Robinson, a
professor of philosophy and psychology who teaches the great ideas at Georgetown University.
"We were driven to perfect ourselves in works of art and in the words of Aeschylus and
Science, for all that it teaches, has a limited focus, and lacks the free play of the imagination that
drives man to achieve a different kind of excellence. Kevin Avruch, who teaches anthropology at
George Mason, signed the petition arguing that students must be educated beyond a technological
His protest, he says, has united professors, both liberal and conservative: "We share a 19th century
view that our job is to educate well-rounded citizens.'' Even if -- or especially when -- they have
03/16/00: The shocking art of the establishment
03/13/00: Sawdust on the campaign trail
03/10/00: Campaign rhetoric of manhood
03/06/00: The Amphetamine of the People
03/02/00: Elegy for Amadou
02/29/00: With only a million, what's a poor girl to do?
02/24/00: The changing politics of change
02/16/00: Tip from Hillary: 'Let 'em eat eggs'
02/10/00: No seances with Eleanor
02/07/00: Campaigning like our founding fathers
02/03/00: When neo-Nazis have short memories
01/31/00: George W. -- 'Ladies man' and 'man's man'
01/27/00: Dead white males and live white politicians
01/25/00: Smarting over presidential smarts
01/21/00: A post-modern song for `The Sopranos'
01/19/00: When personality is a long-distance plus
01/13/00: French lessons in amour --- and marriage
01/10/00: Reaching for the Big Golden Apple
01/07/00: Liddy Dole as the face of feminism
01/04/00: Hillary: From victim to victor
12/30/99: 'Dream catchers' for the millennium
12/27/99: In search of a candidate with strength and eloquence
12/21/99: The president as First Lady
12/16/99: Columbine with blurred hindsight
12/09/99: Homeless deserve discriminating attention
12/07/99: Casual censors and deadly know-nothings
12/02/99: Why mom didn't make general: A reality tale
11/30/99: Potholes on the road to the Promised Land
11/25/99: A feast for the spirit and the stomach
11/23/99: Fathers need to say 'I (can) do'
11/18/99: Adventures of a conservative pundit
11/15/99: Traveling with Jefferson on the information highway
11/11/99: Wanted: 'Foliage of forbiddinness' for the oval office
11/09/99: Eggs, art and rotten commerce
11/05/99: Al Gore, 'Alpha Male'. Bow wow.
11/01/99: Gay love
10/28/99: Lose one Dole, lose two
10/26/99: Rebels with a violent cause
10/21/99: Reforming parents, reforming schools
10/19/99: The male mystique -- he shops
10/13/99:The campaign of the Teletubbies
10/08/99: Money is in the eye of the art dealer
10/01/99: Lincoln's 'Almost Chosen People'
09/29/99: Introducing Bill and Hillary Bickerson
09/27/99: Must we wait for the next massacre?
09/24/99: Miss America meets Miss'd America
09/21/99: Princeton's 'professor death'
09/16/99: The Cisneros lesson
09/13/99: No clemency for personal politics
09/08/99: M-M-M is for manhood
08/30/99: Blocking the schoolhouse door
08/27/99: No kick from cocaine
08/23/99: Movies don't kill people
08/19/99: A rude awakening
08/16/99: Dubyah and that 'language' thing
08/09/99: Chauvinist sows -- oink oink
©1999, Suzanne Fields. Distributed by Los Angeles Times Syndicate