CHI TIẾT NGHIÊN CỨU …
Tiêu đề
A subtle tyranny: Rediscovering the purpose of the liberal arts
Tác giả
Wagner J.
Năm xuất bản
1998
Source title
Interchange
Số trích dẫn
1
DOI
10.1023/A:1007573617775
Liên kết
Tóm tắt
Discord in the academy currently manifests in divisions over political correctness, the content of the canon and the defects of modernity. As scholarly and intellectual matters these concerns arise exclusively from the domain of the liberal arts. At their core, these controversies arguably develop from deep epistemic roots reflecting fundamental differences concerning the nature, purpose and value of the liberal arts. At issue is the integrity of the liberal arts and understanding the nature, purpose and value of these fields depends upon appreciating the distinction between professional, theoretical, and moral studies. One can begin to understand these distinctions by considering the contrast in ordinary language between knowledge and wisdom. For it is arguable that while the notion of wisdom is presumably irrelevant to production or dissemination of knowledge in alt other disciplines, it is demonstrably central to the purpose and value of both research and teaching in each and every liberal art. If this can be shown then it is possible to understand why emphasis on expertise and professionalism, on knowledge for its own sake undermines commitment to common purposes and concerns. By institutionalizing new patterns of behavior, stress on professionalism changes the nature and conception of liberal arts scholarship in ways that produce deep confusions about meaning and value in these fields. The object of this article is to show that unlike other disciplines the liberal arts depend upon shared purposes and concerns such that participation of in a common moral discourse is essential to the integrity and worth of each field. ©Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Từ khóa
Academia; Disciplines; Diversity; Knowledge; Liberal arts; Professionalization; Specialization; Unity; Wisdom
Tài liệu tham khảo
Aristotle, Nicomachean Ethics, (1962); Aristotle, A New Aristotle Reader, (1987); Bell D., Meritocracy and equality, Public Interest, 29, pp. 29-68, (1972); Eliot T.S., Gerontion, Collected Poems, 19091962, (1963); Feyerabend P.K., Against Method (3rd Ed.), (1993); Harris J.F., Against Relativism: A Philosophical Defense of Method, (1992); Herbert N., Quantum Reality: Beyond the New Physics, (1985); Kant I., Critique of Pure Reason, (1787); Nathanson S., The Ideal of Rationality, (1985); Plato, Theaetetus, The Collected Dialogues of Plato, pp. 845-919, (1961); Plato, Five Dialogues, (1981); Rorty R., Objectivity, Relativism and Truth, (1991); Said E.W., Opponents, audiences, constituencies and community, The Anti Aesthetic: Essays in Postmodern Culture, pp. 135-159, (1987); Siegel H., Relativism Refuted, (1987); Wagner J., Political tolerance and stages of moral development: A conceptual and empirical alternative, Political Behavior, pp. 45-80, (1986); Wagner J., Groups, individuals and institutions: The conceptual dilemma in justifying affirmative action, Polity, 23, 1, pp. 77-104, (1990); Wagner J., The revolt against reason: Mistaken assumptions in post-positivist relativism, Critical Thinking: Focus on Social and Cultural Inquiry, pp. 61-87, (1990); Wagner J., Reason and Feeling: The Limits of Gilligan's Care Perspective, (1992); Wagner J., The trouble with multiculturalism, Soundings: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 77, 3-4, pp. 409-427; Wagner J., Incommensurable differences: The confusion of self and other, Philosophy in the Contemporary World, 3, 2, pp. 18-26, (1996)
Nơi xuất bản
Springer Netherlands
Hình thức xuất bản
Review
Open Access
Nguồn
Scopus