The Core Curriculum
Rob's post about his friend Harry got me thinking about the core curriculum. It seems to me you should not be able to graduate from a four-year college without fulfilling the following distribution requirements. They're the bare minimum required to participate fully and usefully in American democracy, understand our culture, understand other cultures, and view the world from the perspective of an educated person. Anyone disagree?
Ancient, medieval and modern history: One term each. (When once I proposed to my father at the age of 16 that I wished to drop out of school and follow the Grateful Dead on tour, he stopped me cold with the question: "Who came first, Thomas Aquinas or Thomas Becket?" I couldn't answer. Actually, I tried to bluff, but I guessed wrong. No one should graduate without a sufficiently deep understanding of the history of the West to be able to take a reasonable guess.)
American history, one term.
History of political thought, one term. I'm perfectly happy to replace every political science class on the books with history classes. And it's not a science, by the way.
English literature from Chaucer to the present: Two terms. No need at all for "creative writing" courses, or any kind of writing course; students should be writing term papers in all of their classes. Above all, if they're to learn to write, they need to learn how to read. No one should graduate without being able to recognize any obvious reference to Shakespeare.
Three years of a foreign language, including a survey class of that language's literature. Yes, three. It takes that long to acquire any useful command of a foreign language. And I think a term abroad--or even a year--should be mandatory. If you choose the right language, it won't be a financial hardship.
Formal logic, predicate and propositional, one term. Too many people just cannot think straight; this is the corrective.
Mathematics through a full year of calculus.
One term of physics, one of chemistry, one of biology.
One term of economics, macro and micro.
A survey course in philosophy.
A survey course in religion. And you better be able to explain to me the difference between Shi'ites and Sunnis when you're done. No one should graduate without being able to recognize any obvious reference to the Old and New Testaments.
A survey course in the history of art or music, preferably both.
I'm thinking that in the year 2010, a class in computer science is probably mandatory, too.
What do you think?
- Comment (45)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (1)
Comments :
May '10
Re: The Core Curriculum
The most important aspect is undoubtedly logic, however I don't think that formal logic is necessary unless someone is pursuing a career in computer science or mathematics or the like. People need to know how to argue using conception, inductive reasoning, and deductive reasoning and can do so easily via a course on informal logic (or, as I did, by reading The Trivium). By contrast, the rigor of formal proofs with well-formed formulas and sentence letters is necessary really only for narrow computer science and mathematical purposes. Neither is knowledge of the propositional and predicate calculi really necessary for cultural literacy purposes.
Re: The Core Curriculum
I disagree (obviously). Even the most cursory survey of any mainstream newspaper will show that most people can't reason their way out of a paper bag. This reflects an educational deficiency that badly needs to be rectified. Logic-lite would be a good start, but formal logic is the gold standard. Only through studying formal logic will students really grasp the difference between syntax and semantics, form and content. They need deeply to understand the structure and meaning of arguments if they're to have much hope of recognizing fallacies in scientific and political reasoning. Formal logic was long considered the foundation of every educational curriculum, and for good reason. Its influence stretches into every other subject--computer science, mathematics, etc, and these aren't "narrow" subjects, as you put it, but worlds in which any educated person should be reasonably comfortable. No, I stand by formal logic. It's just plain good discipline, too.
May '10
Re: The Core Curriculum
If you choose Danish, it will be a financial hardship.
May '10
Re: The Core Curriculum
Mathematics through a full year of calculus.
Arthur Benjamin says statistics is more useful than calculus for most people:
http://www.educationfutures.com/2009/06/29/arthur-benjamin-drop-calculus-mainstream-statistics/
and I tend to agree.
May '10
Re: The Core Curriculum
I think the deficit of reasoning can be cured without resort to formal logic (if I had my way, students would be introduced to informal logic in grammar school and "subjected to it throughout high school as well into college). Surely you know that the concepts of syntax, semantics, form, and content (or "matter" as it was taught to me by Sister Joseph) are covered within informal logic (or "Logic-lite" as some of us would label it). And, of course there's no shortage of expositions on fallacies within informal logic texts. I'm thinking the following to myself: "Would I be happy if every student read The Trivium or Carveth Read's Logic: Deductive and Inductive and understood them like the back of his/her hand?" Yes. If informal logic is taught like Xbox is played, then the young whippersnappers will be fine.
The question is this: Is knowledge of the predicate calculus a necessary condition for the ability to, as you say, "participate fully and usefully in American democracy, understand our culture, understand other cultures, and view the world from the perspective of an educated person." I'm not so sure, to put it mildly.
May '10
Re: The Core Curriculum
I agree with this claim. In particular, people need to be educated in statistical inference (which falls under inductive reasoning) since so much propaganda and "damned lies" are defending using statistics (and not calculus). If people understood exactly what kinds of propositions could be validly concluded from statistics, then we'd be on our way to better government.
Re: The Core Curriculum
I'll go with statistics in addition to, but not as a substitute for, the year of calculus. I might be willing to accept logic-lite if it's sufficiently rigorous. Part of my reasoning here is that everyone needs to go through a year of subjects that force the brain to work in a certain way, the way formal logic and the calculus do, simply to have an appreciation of what it means to reason in those ways -- and why these subjects undergird all modern science and technology.
Re: The Core Curriculum
And also kind of a useless language, unless you plan to spend a lot of time in Denmark, not to mention pretty limited from the literary point of view. For "budget," "useful" and "rich in literature," Spanish will do nicely.
May '10
Re: The Core Curriculum
What's not science, history or political science? If its political science, do you mean political science per se or political science qua contemporary political science?
Re: The Core Curriculum
Political science isn't a science. None of it.
May '10
Re: The Core Curriculum
Take French to impress the ladies.
May '10
Re: The Core Curriculum
How come?
May '10
Re: The Core Curriculum
What's science?
May '10
Re: The Core Curriculum
I just remembered: formal logic is entirely deductive. There is no formalized version of inductive logic, yet inductive logic is just as necessary as deductive. So while the kiddies can learn formal logic and become math and computer science brains, they'll suck at the "natural sciences" which require induction overwhelmingly.
Re: The Core Curriculum
Not to worry, they're also required to take physics, chemistry and biology.
Re: The Core Curriculum
I bet we can settle this right here on Ricochet! Let me put this in my notes under, "Start a thread on this topic when things get boring." I promise I will.
May '10
Re: The Core Curriculum
Claire Berlinski
Not to worry, they're also required to take physics, chemistry and biology. · Jul 27 at 3:45am
Well, hopefully those courses will either include or require for their attendance some sort of education in induction, since the scientific method, that which allows scientists to discover truths in physics, chemistry, and biology, is but an example of a type of inductive argument. Philosopher Leonard Peikoff and Physicist David Harriman stress the importance of inductive reasoning.
May '10
Re: The Core Curriculum
I'd like you to elaborate on the Calculus point Claire, because I just don't see it. Statistics, even accounting, or a survey into theoretical math, but my one year of crappy Ivy League calculus taught by a nearly unintelligible Italian graduate student is utterly useless to me today -- and I work with numbers daily.
Re: The Core Curriculum
Ah, have I got a book for you, Trace ...
May '10
Re: The Core Curriculum
Playful and witty calculus. I'm there. And then maybe the nightmares of not having studied for my calculus exam will finally end.