What's so Practical about Philosophy?
Montaigne urges, in Of the Education of Children, a practical education. We should learn to regulate our habits and our common sense. We should travel, to observe the nature and customs of foreign lands. We should take the time to speak with everyone, scholars and tradesmen alike. But what would Montaigne have for our “principal lesson”? Upon what foundation is this practical education to be constructed? Philosophy.
What professional school today would even recommend a single philosophy course for a practical minded student? What law school or business school or engineering school requires kids to read Plato or Kant or Nietzsche? In what job market would a philosophy major have a head start?
Montaigne’s stated goal for education is the “art of living well”. But the unstated goal of On Education is learning to think well, to think critically. Philosophy isn’t the only way to teach critical thinking, but it’s a far better tool than most of the more practical disciplines, as they are being taught today. My own professional education aspired to teach us to think like lawyers: how to look at problems from the perspective of the legal system. But truthfully, law school education is vocational training. And the oxymoron of legal reasoning, which is often reasoning by false analogy, is regularly borne out in statutes and court decisions that are short on common sense, poorly reasoned, or not really reasoned at all.
A curious footnote to On Education is Montaigne’s disdain for his contemporary science. “[M[ost of the sciences in use are of no use to us….” Singled out for special mention is the knowledge of the stars and the movement of the heavens, the teaching of which is “very stupid”. Today, we would find it peculiar to exclude the sciences from a practical education. Was Montaigne prescient? Did he somehow understand that much of the science of his day was misguided?
And one more thing. Lou Piniella might be a fine manager, but he is terrible as a color guy. I don’t recall a duller guy in the booth for such a big event.
What professional school today would even recommend a single philosophy course for a practical minded student? What law school or business school or engineering school requires kids to read Plato or Kant or Nietzsche? In what job market would a philosophy major have a head start?
Montaigne’s stated goal for education is the “art of living well”. But the unstated goal of On Education is learning to think well, to think critically. Philosophy isn’t the only way to teach critical thinking, but it’s a far better tool than most of the more practical disciplines, as they are being taught today. My own professional education aspired to teach us to think like lawyers: how to look at problems from the perspective of the legal system. But truthfully, law school education is vocational training. And the oxymoron of legal reasoning, which is often reasoning by false analogy, is regularly borne out in statutes and court decisions that are short on common sense, poorly reasoned, or not really reasoned at all.
A curious footnote to On Education is Montaigne’s disdain for his contemporary science. “[M[ost of the sciences in use are of no use to us….” Singled out for special mention is the knowledge of the stars and the movement of the heavens, the teaching of which is “very stupid”. Today, we would find it peculiar to exclude the sciences from a practical education. Was Montaigne prescient? Did he somehow understand that much of the science of his day was misguided?
And one more thing. Lou Piniella might be a fine manager, but he is terrible as a color guy. I don’t recall a duller guy in the booth for such a big event.
posted by pops | 11:23 PM
1 Comments:
Yo pops, What's up with your boyz? I thought this blog was supposed to be a dialouge, not a monolouge. We're getting bored with your sorry-ass musings. It's bad enough you write about someone who's dead for 500 years. But you're old, and tired. You're making me tired. Wake up dog. And let's get some young blood on this blog.
Big up.
Post a Comment
<< Home