Read the argument in favor of cutting philosophy here: Philosophy: To cut or not to cut? The best tools?
I've posted two comments on this column. Here is the first, in response to an argument made by a philosophy grad:
You tell him, Charlee!
Consider the standards of philosophy. For instance, every instructor has a terminal degree. No matter what philosophy class you take, you're being taught by someone passionate enough to pursue the study to the highest degree.
How can the university even consider cutting this program? A university without philosophy fails to be a respectable institute of higher learning.
Philosophy is a foundation upon which all other studies are built. Is it fair to deny science students the philosophy of science? Do we not teach foundations of mathematics (which is, in essence, the philosophy of math)?
The philosophy classes I took at MTSU were exponentially more beneficial than the rest of them combined. If you want to study calculus, for instance, you can simply read a calculus book. This is not the case with philosophy. Philosophy is engaging. It encourages students to think and to question.
Here is the second, in response to the column's writer:
Kurt,
Charlee is absolutely correct. Have you taken a philosophy class at MTSU? If not, I suggest you do. I, too, began college as a major in Basic and Applied Sciences. After my first philosophy class, I added a philosophy minor. After a few more, I made it my second major.
It is unfair to judge the usefulness of philosophy by the same criteria as other disciplines, much like a successful art program operates quite differently from a successful journalism program, and the two would have very different successful results.
Perhaps philosophy does not fit the mold of what MTSU students deem worth because it does not offer immediate results, unlike a chemistry lab or 3-D design project.
The benefits of philosophy are experienced over a lifetime, as the study of philosophy makes way for the study of anything else.
How can you prove the validity of philosophy? I argue it would be quite difficult, considering logic is a form of philosophy, and Godel tells us we cannot use a system to prove the validity of the system.
Instead, look at how we prove things in other areas of study. Do we not use logic? Do we not rely on premeses and conclusions? Withouth philosophy, there would be no science. We would simply have many people with many ideas and no way to prove who is correct.
Philosophy, in its purest sense, is love of wisdom. When you argue that a university should eliminate such a program, you advocate ignorance. That is unacceptable in any discipline.
Read the argument in favor of keeping philosophy here: Philosophy: To cut or not to cut? Origins of college
Here is my response to the column's writer:
Well put, Tiffany.
The fact is, philosophy is a part of every field of study: foundations of mathematics, music theory, philosophy of art, etc. Without philosophy, students are not challenged to consider the "why" behind our learning and reasoning.
Philosophy does not appeal to some because those true philosophers seek to understand and appreciate all areas of study. Most people would rather not put for the effort in exchange for greater understanding.
Why should we punish those who seek the utmost standards of education? Every instructor in philosophy has a terminal degree, for instance. What other program can claim this? What other discipline is so invested in its students' futures?
Be sure to check out the other comments. One of the alums said he would never send another penny to MTSU if they go through with this. I hope others follow his example. I know I will.
No comments:
Post a Comment