An informed position
February 8, 2006
Dr. Grant Havers
Mr. Senft believes that the humanities (in particular, the discipline of philosophy) have no substantive place in a Christian university. The purpose of a university, in his view, is to support the most popular and most practical programs (business, education, etc.). Additionally, this purpose is most consistent with our Christian mission, to send out professionals (not academics) into the marketplace. All of these assumptions reveal that the author has no understanding of what a university is supposed to do for its students. A liberal arts education, which is the very core of our university’s identity, requires that our students give themselves to the contemplation of the great questions. What is humanity? What is the good life? What is the meaning of their existence? This sacrifice, which a study of the Great Books
of the West (and beyond) both requires and articulates, is meant to enrich the very souls of our students, to take them (and their professors) beyond their parochial context to have a conversation with the thinkers of all ages. Presumably, the author assumes, as a practical fellow, that the only thing students want from a university is to help them adapt to the popular and practical concerns of their own time, not to help them understand the concerns of all time. How does he know that all of our students are so parochially minded? The most shocking assumption of the author is that a Christian university must focus on the professional programs, to satisfy the imperative of evangelism. The author assumes that the graduates of these programs require only “practical skills” to spread the gospel of Christ. Presumably, the need to reflect on the nature of the soul, good and evil, and social injustice (all concerns of the humanities) is not “practical” and is not consistent with our university’s mission. Yet the author should recognize that an education in skills alone is no education: skills on their own may foster a sense of efficiency, but do little to cultivate a thoughtful and critical mind. Was Christ simply teaching about “skills,” or demanding that his people thoughtfully critique the idols of their time? By all means Christians should “infiltrate” the professional fields, as the author suggests, but a true Christian professional must think. The Enrons of our time are full of “professionals” who are practically minded and unreflective at the same time. I agree with the author that the humanities will never be popular, nor should its practitioners seek to have this quality. The humanities, especially when informed by the biblical tradition, will always question the credos of any age. As long as TWU supports this mission, it is a university, not a technical college.
Now you go...
2 Responses to “An informed position”
Got something to say?
“Presumably, the author assumes, as a practical fellow, that the only thing students want from a university is to help them adapt to the popular and practical concerns of their own time, not to help them understand the concerns of all time.”
That’s some good writing, Havers is in prime form. As this pertains to a Christian university, in a fundamental way the human called by God into relationship with Him is inevitably called into a contemplation of the eternal, rather than the ephemeral. This makes Senft’s equation of “evangelistic” with “solely practical” contrary to the very fabric of that relationship. How can we evangelize the world and call people into contemplating the eternal God, if we eschew the study of timeless ideas (and ideals) and concern ourselves only with the ephemeral?
I would just like to say, that as a student of two of Haver’s philosophy classes, I am quite aware of the purpose of the university and the importance of critical thought. As a student only a few credits away from a philosophy minor, I can say that I fully understand the many flaws of the article.
This article wasn’t meant to be unassailable as it takes an absurdist position. It was however meant to be a tongue in cheek critique of the elitism within the humanities department and their condescending view towards the business school. As a double major of both business and the humanities I am frustrated with the condescension on both sides.
This article was meant to be inflammatory and I have been especially impressed with the response it has received on campus. Obviously it hit on an issue, or at least a perceived issue as to the direction of the school.
And I’d just like to say that I am seriously impressed that I elicited a response from non other than the esteemed Dr. Grant Havers. I think that’s pretty close to my greatest academic achievement ever.
Thanks everyone, it’s been fun.