Friday, February 14, 2014

"Intellectual Artillery"

I heard this term on the radio the other day and it struck me as a wonderful expression, "intellectual artillery." It was used in the context of discussing the current (well, at least the last couple of decades) trendy educational practice of dropping the study of Western Civilization--its history, literature, ideas, etc.--in favor of a more global (Oh, I don't like that word!) approach.  I'm never one to say the study of, say, 2nd Century BC or 12th Century Africa isn't important and desirable.  But, realistically, if time spend in formal education is limited, and it is, which has more to offer students and their lives?

The discussion turned to the study of the classics and "arming people with intellectual artillery."  One angle struck me as particularly cogent.  One of the speakers iterated something about the classics leaving students with the feeling that "I want more!"  Yes!  No doubt much of what I learned at Amherst I've forgotten and, in fact, likely didn't register to me then.  (Sometimes I think college is wasted on the young!)  I do, remember, though, that 15% of the Frankfurt Assembly of 1848 was composed of craftsmen and artisans!  (That's a very inside joke, but true.)  What has stuck with me all these years from my Amherst professors is just that, "I want more!"  They instilled a curiosity, a love of learning.  I can't die yet!  There's a lot more to learn!

BTW, I also heard some pundit on the radio say the federal courts should leave the states alone when it comes to recognition/legalization of gay marriages.  "The feds should stay out of it," he said.  (It was a substitute host and I don't have any idea of his name.)  Hmmm......  There is a lot "the feds should stay out of," but is this one of them?  Had I been able to confront this guy, I'd have asked if it was within the federal courts' (The Supremes in this instance) to rule unconstitutional state bans on interracial marriages??????  I believe that was the Loving case (?).  No, when states discriminate against any group of people the federal government should step in.

No comments: