For liberal Education: Struggle and the Common Good
Ever since the concept of a liberal education was first established in the schools of Paris during the 12th century, Western educators have been attempting to answer the question: What is a liberally educated man? As societies have become more complex, knowledge more extensive and pervasive, and culture more profane and pluralistic, the answers to this question have become both more profound and more elusive. When raised in academe today, it usually is accompanied by a second query such as: What and how can education in chemistry contribute to the development of such a man? Both questions are very much in the minds of chemical educators these days. Many agree that a liberally educated man is one who understands the nature of things so he can better appreciate, respond to, and interact with the material world around him, and one who understands the nature of man so he can better appreciate, respond to, and interact with his fellows. The understanding required here is such that, it should give the individual power in and over the unpredictable future, and a commitment to the use of intelligence for the common good. Implicit i.- this description of the liberally educated man is the idea that, in a free and viable society, the great majority of citizens must be so educated. Acquiring (or teaching) the kind of understanding needed to exercise power in and over the unpredictable future is, of course, a matter of considerable difficulty and great substance. However, higher education can and must find mechanisms for encouraging large numbers of students to develop this ability. The problem here, especially in America today, is less one of ignorance than of malformed opinion which can then determine action. Thus, our schools, media, metchants, governments, and other institutions, in flooding us with information of all kinds, have created an atmosphere of continuous learning, a sensitivity to new ideas and new products, and an awareness of injustice, inequity and of the need to change. At the same time, however, they have so exploited the power of opinion, and so fostered, often championed, the notion that equally intelligent, rational and valid arguments can be made on any and all sides of a question, that all too many have a grossly distorted and simplistic view of the kind of understanding required for making wise decisions on vital matters. When this is coupled with the fact that for the average American, the world offersfew real diiculties, dangers, wants, or limitations to his development-as compared with the kinds of hardships faced by most men throughout most of history-it is perhaps not surprising that opinions based on shallow or selfish considerations have become chronic. The challenge to higher education, then, is to demonstrate once again, and in the face of opulence and
Ieditorially speaking
solipsism, that knowledge and understanding are still the parents of wisdom and prudence, and that good judgment, the most trusted companion of happiness, needs constant exercise. A liberal education today must offer a good deal more than the gentle generalism and the puerile intellectualism many have associated with this concept in the past. Perhaps the place to start to improve liberal education is to show the inevitability and the value of struggle in the life of any who would contribute. The concept of struggle has unusual unifying power. I t links us with the great contributors of the past, while at the same time humbling us into recognizing our own lirnitations, and challenging us to rise above ourselves. Struggle also gives most of us a deeper, stronger understanding of others, makes us more sensitive to their needs, more committed to the common good. As a people we need a stronger commitment to the common good. If there is a fatal flaw in the educated American, it is his insistence on his rights, his freedom, his place in the sun, and all without a thought of what this might do to others. For all too many, any means are justified in accomplishing desired ends. Situation ethics, otherwise known as, "How can I get my way?" has become the standard operating principle of a large fraction of our middle class. While higher education cannot replace the home and the church in providing moral leadership, it can and should supply the intellectual foundations of morality in an atmosphere consistent with these foundations. And it should, if only to remain faithful to its own concept of liberal education, set an impeccable example of commitment to the common good. Only then can it hope to produce liberally educated men and women. Chemistry can contribute much to liberal education. It can help the student acquire that understanding of the nature of things that will enable him to live more happily and more harmoniously in the material world. It can demonstrate how knowledge and understanding of that world can lead to prudent decisions concerning the use and conservation of natural resources; and how one uses such knowledge and understanding to develop good judgment and good habits of thinking. It can illustrate the importance of struggle by historical examples and practical experience, and it can supply intellectual foundations of morality by its commitment to objectivity and to intellectual discipline and honesty. While it cannot in itself provide learned insight into the nature of man, its history, its literature and its practitioners offer a fertile field for such study. In working to improve the liberal education component, we hope the highest priorities will be given to persuadmg students to accept the challenge of struggle WTL and to place the common good above all.
Volume 49, Number 7 , July 1972
/
447
