
##4000350 Section : ISSUES <p> When Allan Bloom wrote The Closing of the American Mind , he was probably not thinking of the " closed mind " under the image of a contraceptive . Still less would anyone be likely to think of the " open mind " that way . But such was precisely the image that seemed to govern a series of events at Princeton University this past year , which culminated in the dismissal of one of the official Catholic chaplains. 1 <p> C. John McCloskey is a young priest who belongs to Opus Dei ( the Work of God ) , a mixed lay-clerical organization founded in Spain in the 1920s with branches throughout the Catholic world . Opus Dei prides itself on its loyalty to the pope and its rigorous spiritual discipline . Some of its members were active in the Franco government in Spain , and the group has often been accused of having a conservative political ideology . Officially , Opus Dei states that it has no political position as such but that its members are free to engage in political activity @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Opus Dei members are known to be politically active . <p> The group has for years been in the habit of establishing houses near elite universities , and seems to recruit new members primarily from such environments . ( There are degrees of affiliation , some of which are relatively loose . ) The group was active at Princeton as early as 1987 , and in 1989 it purchased a house just off campus to serve as its local headquarters . The purchase alarmed some Princetonians , indicating as it did that the organization intended to become a permanent presence at the university . <p> Almost from the beginning , rumors about the group and its alleged hidden agenda were circulated in both Catholic and non-Catholic circles in the community . Among liberal Catholics , Opus Dei has an image somewhat like that of the Masons in earlier times -- a malign secret organization with controlling tentacles moving in all directions . Little of this has ever been documented and , whatever the group may do in other parts of the world , it is clear that in the United States @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ personal piety . <p> From 1970 to 1988 the official Catholic chaplain at Princeton was Father Charles Weiser , a Trenton diocesan priest who directed the Aquinas Foundation . This organization is Princeton 's equivalent of the Newman Clubs elsewhere , and has its headquarters in a house once occupied by Thomas Mann . Weiser was appointed by the bishop of Trenton and was officially recognized by the university . By his own account , Weiser was at first cool to Opus Dei , and he describes his early encounters with McCloskey as less than friendly . Eventually however , he made the decision to appoint McCloskey an assistant director of the Aquinas Foundation , as much as anything , according to Weiser , " to keep an eye on him . " 2 <p> Shortly afterwards Weiser terminated official relations with another assistant chaplain , Jesuit Father Robert Ferrick , because of disagreements over Aquinas Foundation policies . Rather than accept Weiser 's policies , Ferrick left Princeton , but his departure caused a good deal of bitterness among his campus admirers . <p> Running through the dispute over Opus @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and it is revealing that Ferrick 's most ardent admirers , who attended a weekly midnight Mass he celebrated , referred to themselves as " the Druids . " One of them , the left-wing journalist Gloria Emerson , noted : " Something remarkable must have been going on to get a Jewish undergraduate , a Puerto Rican methodist sic , and an agnostic together for a Catholic worship service . " 3 Ferrick himself , in his farewell message , listed his constituency as " Druids , chapel colleagues , black and Latino friends , those concerned with alcohol and drug abuse , the harassed , the marginal , the foreigner . " 4 Notably absent from the list were those he had been appointed primarily to serve : traditional Catholics . <p> Ferrick 's departure was the occasion for the first public attacks on Opus Dei , attacks notable for the fact that , in one of the major scholarly communities in the United States , they were made without any felt need to offer proof , not even to define terms . Thus Walter Murphy , a Catholic @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ saying Opus Dei had " Fascist ties . " 5 The closest Opus Dei 's critics ever came to offering proof of their charges of a malign hidden agenda was a frequent citing of the book The People of God : The Struggle for World Catholicism ( Viking , 1989 ) , by the late left-wing journalist Penny Lernoux , which claims that Opus Dei has been involved in various right-wing movements in Latin America . Lernoux was hardly a disinterested scholar , and Opus Dei officials pointed out that the organization had won a libel suit against her in a West German court . Her book , however , was cited over and over again as irrefutable evidence of Opus Dei 's sinister nature . <p> This alarm was fueled , within a community that prides itself on openness and rationality , by almost unlimited attention in both the campus and the community press to all the group 's critics , frequently citing the same people saying the same things over and over again . For a while no mention of Opus Dei in Princeton failed to recall that the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ woman found murdered in the basement , despite the fact that this information had absolutely no bearing on the controversy . <p> For some months before the McCloskey case came to a boil , the press related how some Princeton Catholics were " worried " about the organization and its possible intentions , calling it " cult-like " and possessing a " right-wing reputation . " 6 Murphy alleged that Opus Dei had particularly " targeted " Ivy League universities , a charge which , if true , merely proved that it accepts those institutions ' own evaluation of their worth . Weiser , initially unsympathetic to Opus Dei , observed with some irony the behavior of highly rational academics : <p> The guy ( McCloskey ) was coming down here three times a week and people are paralyzed by anxiety . The immediate feeling I had was that they were acting like an elephant jumping on a chair trying to get away from a mouse . People were afraid Opus Dei was going to take over. 7 <p> Critics of McCloskey studiously avoided one inconvenient fact -- students and others @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , and it was by no means clear that his critics outnumbered his supporters . The critics claimed , with considerable vehemence , that McCloskey 's approach to religion was inherently offensive and oppressive and , in case that fact was not known widely enough , gave it maximum publicity . But , if that was so , it seemed to follow that in a highly sophisticated community like Princeton , McCloskey 's approach would have little success and he would in time be forced to withdraw . What really bothered his critics , which for obvious reasons they could not admit , was that intelligent people , including undergraduates , did find his message attractive . The critics ' task , then , was to save such people from themselves . <p> The most vocal critic was an undergraduate named Robert Taliercio , a member of the left-wing religious group Pax Christi ( the Peace of Christ ) , who was one of those constantly referring to Opus Dei 's supposed " right-wing " political ties . Taliercio claimed to have attended an Opus Dei program in Spain one summer @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ members lived in " very luxurious " surroundings. 8 If living in opulence is grounds for condemnation , it might be supposed that many Princeton students themselves would have to be damned . However , for all the talk about " right-wing " political ideology , no Princeton critic of Opus Dei ever reported any direct experience of this . No one claimed that McCloskey tried to influence his political views , or to recruit him into any kind of political activity , even on such identifiably " Catholic " issues as abortion . <p> Instead , a small number of students reported that they had been offended by McCloskey 's approach to what the Catholic Church calls " spirituality " or personal religious discipline . Some undergraduates ( no more than a half dozen were ever identified ) complained that he was " overly negative , " " rigid , " and " censorious , " which turned out to mean that he placed a good deal of emphasis on personal sin , warned students to avoid certain " occasions of sin , " and suggested that the larger world @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ merely classical Christian doctrine ( once taught at Princeton and other Protestant schools ) and , if it is indeed unattractive to modern Americans , the problem , again , would have been self-correcting -- McCloskey would simply have failed in his mission . Thus critics were forced once more to avoid the central issue : that in a truly " pluralistic " environment Catholics were free to accept or reject McCloskey 's advice as they saw fit . Instead , they had to go through remarkable contortions to conceal the fact that they simply wanted church and university authorities to suppress an individual whose views they found personally distasteful . <p> Some attempt was made to imply that McCloskey had engaged in improper actions , such as a female student 's claim that he questioned her in the confessional about her sexual activities. 9 Allegedly , these improprieties had been reported to university authorities . The nadir of yellow journalism in the case was reached by the Trenton Times , which reported that evidence of these actions had been given to " university sources , who prefer to remain anonymous @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ action against them . " 10 The Times thus found it possible to insinuate serious improprieties on McCloskey 's part , to offer no proof , to claim that the evidence existed but was being suppressed , and to charge that the university had been intimidated by Opus Dei . ( If the university did indeed keep the complaints confidential for fear of legal action , a logical assumption might be that the complaints were unfounded and would not withstand scrutiny . ) <p> Unable to state frankly that they sought to suppress McCloskey 's opinions simply because they found them offensive , his critics next fell back on a relatively narrow point -- that he should not be allowed to represent the Aquinas Foundation , since it would officially associate the Catholic Church with his own allegedly distorted theology . But it was the prerogative of the foundation 's director , and ultimately of the bishop of Trenton , to decide who could enjoy official status in the chaplaincy . Weiser later stated that he had investigated every complaint against McCloskey and found no improprieties , even though he did @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ <p> The logic of the critics ' position was that no one who could be viewed as " controversial " ought to be given official status by the foundation , a contention they would hardly have defended under other circumstances ( Father Ferrick had also been highly controversial ) . A priest who , for example , might have offended some people by passionately supporting the Sandinistas in Nicaragua would in all likelihood be dubbed a " prophet " and praised for his courage . <p> The nub of the issue was half-consciously expressed by Taliercio when he accused Opus Dei of trying to " stamp out those who do not agree . " 11 But McCloskey was not demanding the expulsion from the Aquinas Foundation of those who did not support his views ; rather the reverse was the case . In effect his critics ' position was , " Opus Dei wants to suppress disagreement , so we have to suppress it first . " It was the dilemma of modern liberalism in a nutshell : is " tolerant pluralism " either tolerant or pluralistic enough to tolerate those @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to " tolerating " only those whose views are like its own ? <p> Taliercio said that he had originally been attracted to Opus Dei because " it provided security and it makes complicated lives very simple . Everything is black and white . You do n't have to think . " 12 It was a curious confession for an Ivy League student to make , prompting , as it did , the obvious question , " If you were so easily manipulated then , how do you know that you are really ' thinking ' right now ? " But it was also necessary to justify the exercise in liberal censorship -- those who accept the Opus Dei position allegedly do not do so with full freedom and understanding , and must be protected by those who know better . <p> In December 1989 , Suzi Landolphi , a professional comedienne , performed a routine at Princeton designed to promote both " safe sex " and feminism , which included such things as pulling a male student in front of a video camera , ordering him to say " vaginal @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it got caught in your throat . " She also had female students stretch condoms over male students ' heads as a means of " desensitizing " the audience to contraceptives . McCloskey subsequently published a letter in the Daily Princetonian , the official campus newspaper , objecting that Landolphi viewed students as " salivating animals without any capacity for self-control . " 13 One student responded in a letter by accusing McCloskey of trying once more to " enslave " women with " the holy bond of matrimony " and of " keeping them barefoot , pregnant and in the kitchen , " an illogical charge given the fact that McCloskey was preaching chastity . The student concluded by suggesting that " perhaps the Princeton community . and society at large should advise McCloskey to take to drinking nothing but the semen of AIDS patients . " 14 <p> Earlier , McCloskey 's critics had met with the new director of the Aquinas Foundation , a Trenton diocesan priest named Vincent Keane , to demand McCloskey 's removal . Keane , who remained publicly noncommital , let it be known @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for using the foundation 's name in his letter . <p> Following the " semen " letter it might have been thought that at least some of McCloskey 's critics would begin to wonder whether the tone of the debate was sinking lower than was proper for an elite university , but there is no evidence that they were embarrassed by such rhetoric . In some ways the essence of the matter was stated by another student letter-writer , who explicitly denied that Opus Dei was entitled to the toleration of a " pluralistic , open society " on the grounds that " their agenda is to establish a universal hegemonic view . " The writer concluded . " In a plural , liberal democracy , McCloskey is allowed to spread his AIDS : Assault on Inquiry , Discourses , and Speech . But we have our contraceptives : open minds . " 15 The Landolphi incident revealed most clearly that the real opposition to Opus Dei , therefore , was not over its alleged " right-wing " political ties , but over sexual " liberation , " and McCloskey was @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ " because he dared to disagree publicly with current conventional wisdom . Intellectual freedom was explicitly described as a " contraceptive , " the purpose of which is to exclude consideration of unfashionable views . <p> That sexual orthodoxy was the root of the tension between McCloskey and some in the Princeton community was confirmed when the G. K. Chesterton Society sponsored a talk by Maggie Gallagher , the author of a book arguing that women have been exploited by the sexual revolution . Gallagher faced a partially hostile audience , which at one point pelted the stage with condoms . A feminist student published a review of the speech which stopped just short of saying that Gallagher should have been barred from campus , arguing that she appeared under false pretenses , since she failed to acknowledge that she supported " patriarchy. " 16 The Chesterton Society was then accused of being an Opus Dei front organization founded to give the group unmerited intellectual respectability , although members pointed out that only some of them were affiliated with Opus Dei . <p> McCloskey 's defenders soon found themselves in a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ forth yet another barrage of attacks , which widened to include not only McCloskey but any student who dared to defend him . The techniques were classic McCarthyism : ceaselessly repeated charges offered without proof , unsubstantiated claims often by unnamed people , hints about confidential evidence which was being suppressed . Opus Dei found itself in the impossible situation of having to say , in effect , over and over again : " We are not a cult . " <p> McCloskey 's critics repeatedly criticized the Aquinas Foundation and the university for not investigating their charges . But Luis Tellez , head of Opus Dei 's Princeton house , pointed out that no one had ever filed a formal complaint against McCloskey with the university authorities , which would have resulted in an investigation in which McCloskey could have defended himself . The critics ' weapon was primarily an unceasing propaganda barrage , and they seem to have calculated ( correctly , as it turned out ) , that such an assault would eventually achieve their goal without the obligation of having to prove their charges in any rigorous @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ concerning matters of sexual behavior , the critics began claiming that he had warned students against taking particular courses and prohibited them from reading particular books , and that Opus Dei members themselves are forbidden to read certain works . They therefore asserted that McCloskey 's approach to education was fundamentally at odds with the nature of the university . McCloskey , in turn , claimed that the allegations were untrue or highly distorted . The only " smoking gun " the critics could find , which they attempted to establish as the murder weapon , was a memo from the priest listing about forty " courses of possible interest from a Christian culture viewpoint at Princeton University . " 17 The list was drawn directly from the university catalogue and included nine academic departments , its net cast wide enough to include both " The Religion of Islam " and " The Origins of Modern Science . " Criticism centered on a note appended to the list : " Remember everything depends on the outlook of the teacher giving the course . The latter may seem quite interesting and stimulating @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ impact is counter-productive . " This warning , critics trumpeted , was censorship of the worst kind and in violation of the very nature of free inquiry . <p> But no critic even alleged that McCloskey 's list omitted courses that should have been included , which would have been the obvious way of " censoring " courses the priest thought unacceptable , and on the face of it the list was a recommendation , not a condemnation . McCloskey gave no indication which courses , if any , he considered " anti-Christian , " and his warning was no different from the kind feminists and militant ethnic minorities issue all the time on university campuses . Thus critics were in the position to assert that McCloskey had no right to evaluate university courses , no matter how mildly or obliquely , a curious understanding of the nature of free inquiry . <p> At the end of last March , six students circulated an open letter to the Princeton community accusing McCloskey of using the tactics of " intimidation " and claiming that his presence on campus was detrimental to the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ their names appended to the list , not all of them Catholics . ( Although McCloskey 's critics portrayed him as fostering ignorance , in contrast to those like themselves who valued knowledge , their publicity was consistently marred by elementary errors . Thus , on their petition the name of the historian Carl Schorske was spelled " Scherske , " and one student claimed that McCloskey had warned her against reading " Bertram " Russell . ) <p> Tellez issued a detailed response to the petition , mentioning , among other things , the libel suit against Penny Lernoux and the fact that no formal complaint against McCloskey had been lodged with the university ; he also said that certain statements attributed to McCloskey were not authentic . McCloskey 's defenders were at a constant disadvantage , however , since his critics used each defense merely as an occasion to mount the same charges even more aggressively , a tactic which both the university and the community press were more than willing to permit . <p> Keane , who had met with twenty people demanding McCloskey 's ouster , now @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ had " no right " to warn students about " anti-Christian " courses. 19 Keane cited his own experience as a college professor ( of speech pathology ) to justify his judgment , apparently an act of professional solidarity with professors for whom freedom includes immunity from criticism . The Daily Princetonian , after giving McCloskey 's critics maximum publicity for months , now formally sided with those critics in an editorial decreeing that the " Opus Dei group should be allowed to preserve its religious identity -- but only to the extent that its practices do not intrude upon the university 's academic mission . " 20 Both this statement and Keane 's seemed to imply that academic freedom includes professors ' immunity from " outside " criticism . The Princetonian 's formula also seemed to imply that Opus Dei 's preservation of its religious identity is a privilege granted by the university . <p> In April , Keane announced that McCloskey would not be returning to the Aquinas Foundation in the fall , a decision McCloskey said had been conveyed to him in December , the time of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ approximately nine hundred Catholic students on campus had signed the petition against him , and categorically denied their charges . The Princetonian article announcing his dismissal was a comedy of errors which scarcely bolstered the claim that McCloskey 's critics represented responsible scholarship . Keane appeared to be advocating affirmative action for Hawaiians when he was quoted as saying that he hoped to replace McCloskey with a " lei woman , " and the student paper identified Keane 's photograph as McCloskey 's , giving rise to a deliciously wicked fantasy on the part of McCloskey 's supporters , that of posting copies of the paper all over campus with the notation , " This man has been officially found to be dangerous to students . If you see him on campus , detain him and call the police . " <p> Now , even the claim by McCloskey 's critics that the issue was the relatively narrow one of whether he ought to be officially associated with the Aquinas Foundation was belied when , following the announcement of his " non-renewal , " they continued to press for a university @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ air the same charges against him . <p> Keane 's action in surrendering to McCloskey 's critics was curious in part because of their increasingly frank agenda . One student writing for the Princetonian accepted Opus Dei 's claim to loyalty to the pope but asserted that " good Catholics " need pay no attention to him. 21 One leader of the anti-McCloskey faction , who published a lengthy attack against him , signed a pro-abortion advertisement in the Princetonian. 22 However , when Weiser wrote a letter to the newspaper arguing that McCloskey had been mistreated , it was not published . ( The letter later appeared in a conservative student publication , the Princeton Sentinel , in a summary of the case in which several of the students who signed the petition against McCloskey admitted that they never met him and had signed at the urging of their friends. ) 23 <p> McCloskey and Opus Dei intend to remain active in Princeton , and McCloskey has said that his exclusion from the Aquinas Foundation might actually make his work easier . The pastor of St. Paul 's Catholic Church @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ board member of the Aquinas Foundation who said he was not consulted about McCloskey 's removal , has commented : " It seems that a little orthodoxy scares a lot of people . " 24 Princeton University itself seems to bear little responsibility for what happened to the priest . There is no evidence that the university sought his removal , although the few officials who spoke publicly mildly criticized McCloskey . Primary responsibility rests with Keane , who appears to have decided simply to buy peace . Even if every single charge against McCloskey were true , his comments and actions were within the bounds of what is usually defined as academic freedom . Ironically , in the future , those in the Princeton community . inclined to think that Catholic officials fail to respect this freedom have only to look at the treatment accorded John McCloskey to find prime evidence for their thesis . <p> 
##4000351 Section : REPORTS FROM THE ACADEMY PREFORMATTED TABLE <p> -- Alexander Pope <p> My association with the English department at Duke University began in 1971 . Having taken my bachelor 's and master 's degrees at the University of Tennessee , I was looking for a place to study for the doctorate , and was interested in a change in academic scenery . As I considered various programs , Duke University kept surfacing as a particularly attractive choice . It was small , but not too small ; it had educated two of my best undergraduate professors ; its library was spectacularly fine ; and with its gothic architectural splendor and lush gardens it was the most beautiful place I had ever seen . Furthermore , in my English studies thus far , I had often found Duke scholars such as Allan Gilbert on Dante and the Renaissance , Benjamin Boyce on eighteenth-century culture , Newman I. White on Shelley , and Lionel Stevenson , C. R. Sanders , and Paull F. Baum on Victorian literature particularly valuable . Their work was thorough , serious , and solid @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ something new and worthwhile . <p> I entered the doctoral program at Duke , concentrating primarily on eighteenth- and nineteenth-century English literature ; and after taking my Ph.D . in 1975 , moved on to the University of Rochester as an Andrew Mellon Postdoctoral Fellow . Thus began a career that has taken me to a number of institutions , given me a chance to write , teach , and chair ( for perhaps too many years ) an English department , and generally has allowed me to experience the kinds of ups and downs usually associated with an academic career . Through it all , I found that my training at Duke served me well . Duke could not , of course , strike brilliance from such ordinary stuff as I , but it did give me a thorough grounding in the English language and English literary history , and an exposure to a very broad range of English , American , and " world " literature . It also instilled in me the sense that however important " the profession " and my own career might be to me @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ literature and culture were much more so , and moreover , quite transcended in significance the relatively small world of American academic life . <p> After 1975 I had little contact with affairs at Duke . Then , in the fall of 1983 , I received a Duke University English Newsletter , a publication promising to be the first in an " on-going semi-annual enterprise to keep alumni and friends of the Department up to date on what 's going on in the Department . " My first , perhaps naive , response was one of at least mild pleasure . Learning about the goings-on in one 's old graduate program seemed innocent enough , though I do remember thinking that the rather slickly produced publication seemed just a bit vulgar and out of key with the Duke I had known . In my time , self-advertisement was viewed with something like disdain , and we graduate students joked that the classic departmental recommendation was the one-sentence statement that a given candidate was " not without redeeming virtue . " Well , this chirpy little newsletter was a far cry from @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the whole inoffensive . It listed the current departmental faculty , with a paragraph about each professor 's background and publications . At the end of this section , however , I came bolt upon the following : <p> We hope that it is our humanness , as well as our professional achievements , that will come to the fore in future issues of the Newsletter -- enough so , at least , to make you want to read about who and what we are , what we do , what we think , and even what we 're like when we are outside the hallowed halls of academe . <p> Perhaps I was too sensitive , but this statement positively jarred . Just what did they mean by " humanness " ? I was certainly far from convinced that , whatever it might be , it could be communicated in a six-page newsletter . Suspecting them of cant , I thought they rather expected more interest in them personally than was warranted . <p> If I detected something self-serving and self-important in that statement , some of my fears were @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , a " successful " " Duke Writers ' Conference " was discussed , which " attracted national attention " ( apparently a mention in the New York Times ) , held " rigorous workshops , " and created a " rich environment . " Another item noted a ( predictably ) " successful " Association of Departments of English meeting held at Duke having " virtues other than statistical " and featuring papers " exhibiting gratifying qualifies of mutual admiration . " It was concluded that " the most fortunate departments are those at small , private universities " -- like Duke , no doubt . The issue closed with the revelation that the Ph.D . no longer required " historical distribution . " Now each program would be " shaped by the individual student , " and Ph.D . courses " spoke more directly to the students ' courses of concentrated study , " and were " extremely popular . " <p> Here , I began to see two features that would become all too characteristic of subsequent issues : an emphasis on publicity as opposed to intellectual value @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the department 's favor . The newsletter , I would soon realize , seldom reported anything without first assuring the reader it was " excellent , " " successful , " " the best , " or " important . " This left the unsettling impression that self-congratulation , publicity-seeking , and a very dubious curricular " freedom " had become the order of the day . <p> The Spring 1984 issue contained a rather bland section on the journals published by the department . Although it focused a bit heavily on the great distinction of these journals , the rest of this issue was informative and relatively modest . <p> When Fall 1984 arrived , I was gratified by the long lead article on the great Carlyle Letters project . This undertaking , begun by C. R. Sanders in the sixties , is a genuinely important work of literary scholarship -- arguably the finest ever done at Duke . A lengthy piece followed , however , on a new department member , Prof. Frank Lentricchia , who seemed an odd choice for Duke . He was himself a 1966 Duke @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ upon in my time . Furthermore , his recent work had focused on highly theoretical , contemporary , political , and rather narrowly professional subjects . After the New Criticism ( 1980 ) , his most notable book , achieved great success due , I suspect , to the hope of many bewildered scholars that it would help them make sense of the opaque , jargon-ridden wastes of " contemporary theory . " At one point , Prof. Lentricchia tossed a crumb in the direction of Duke 's past commitment to historical literary scholarship , but it was clear to anyone familiar with his work that his loyalties lay elsewhere and that a department comprised of Lentricchia and others like him would be unlikely to produce another Carlyle Letters project . Indeed , his appearance on the scene strongly suggested that an idea of scholarship was beginning to obtain that was less catholic , literary , balanced , and disinterested than I had known . <p> My suspicions were increased by another piece on the new undergraduate English major , which , it was said , would now concentrate on " @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ " A student " interested primarily in the history of the novel " could now mainly take courses related to that interest ; requirements based on historical , literary " periods " would be largely scrapped . Lest readers consider this approach flimsy , ahistorical , overly specialized , or irresponsible , the Newsletter assured us that students were required to take a course on a major author ( Chaucer , Shakespeare , or Milton ) . How one course on Milton would make much sense to an undergraduate largely read in the " history of the novel " the Newsletter did not indicate . My fears about the Duke of 1984 crystallized when the piece concluded with the following example of English prose : " As students recognize the excellence of an English major to later experience , both personal and professional , we hope to see increased interest in our courses continue . " It was a use of " excellence " with which I was unfamiliar . <p> The Spring 1985 Newsletter , on first blush , brought little bad news . But , in the midst of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ S. Eliot , and Robert Penn Warren , there was an incoherent and largely incomprehensible piece by Prof. Gerald Monsman on his application of Derrida 's " deconstructive possibilities " to Walter Pater and ( of all people ) Charles Lamb : <p> I pointed out that for Pater ... there is no privileged source of meaning within the text -- not the author 's life , not the fate of his characters , not the text 's intellectual precursors , not the increments appended to it by the reader-critic -- but rather , that each component generates alternative possibilities of meaning because the imagery of the text contains within itself multiple , contradictory echoes . <p> This passage left me with three reflections : first , that this might -- given de-constructionist assumptions -- be applied to any writer ; second , that Prof. Monsman 's prose had benefited little from his study of Pater ; and , third , that this was a rather ominous straw in the wind regarding the English department . <p> I was at least right about the third reflection . In further reading , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ replaced by a fragmented , " **29;54;TOOLONG " affair involving seven different courses , each doing its " own thing , " taught by faculty from every manner of department , and presided over by a resident " composition theorist . " The crowning touch was that each freshman would choose which course best suited him . <p> This latest revelation regarding program " reform " brought everything into focus . Whether freshman , senior major , or Ph.D . candidate , each student was to do whatever was right in his own eyes . Any concept of common expectations , experience , and bodies of knowledge , as well as a meaningful core curriculum , was clearly becoming a rare bird at Duke . It then dawned on me that without all these , not only students , but professors also would be blissfully free to pursue merely their own specialized interests . This insight would prove useful in " deconstructing " later newsletters . <p> Looking back I see that the first four issues were merely preparatory . Their self-congratulation , self-advertisement , general complacency , justification of questionable @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ were prelude to the grand announcement in the Fall 1985 issue that Stanley Fish was coming to Duke , as was his wife and fellow theorist Jane Tompkins . It was also noted , though rather parenthetically , that Fredric Jameson , America 's " foremost Marxist critic , " would soon grace the halls of Duke . <p> Clearly , something big was afoot . We had been told that the emperor was being fitted for a set of magnificent new clothes , and now the attendants were arriving with the complete line . Just what Prof. Fish 's impending presence signified was evident : <p> In accord with his resistance to orthodoxies and impetus to change , Fish feels that the greatest excitement in literary studies today is in feminist studies because of the " unwillingness to stop at any boundary real and imagined . " He notes that the " revisionary energy " of literary studies currently rests in feminist studies . <p> Prof. Tompkins , in an accompanying piece , described her view of literature as " a form of political power , " her " suspiciousness @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ literary works that do " social work . " She indicated that as a " populist and feminist critic " she " likes to say that ' the road from Uncle Tom 's Cabin leads to The Valley of the Dolls . ' " Even to a reader of limited insight , it was evident that Prof. Lentricchia and Prof. Monsman were but humble John-the-Baptists to the true prophets . Those prophets had now arrived -- and with a new gospel . <p> The precise nature of that gospel became brilliantly clear in succeeding issues . Anything concerning traditional literary study , literary history , " the canon " -- literature per se -- was out , or at least deeply suspect . Contemporary " theory , " postmodernism , " pop culture , " " political approaches , " " gay studies , " " feminist studies , " and " the New Historicism " ( with its Marxist assumptions ) were the " new Duke . " Despite the seeming diversity of these approaches , their essential sameness was quickly revealed in the newsletter -- though such revelations could @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ theory . " When , for instance , Prof. Fish was quoted in the Fall 1988 issue as saying : " Once you have subtracted from the accidents of class , race , gender , and political circumstance , what is it that you have left ? " it was perfectly in character . <p> The sorts of preoccupations and limitations implicit in Prof. Fish 's question quickly came to shape almost everything in the department , and this was mirrored in the Newsletter . Thus in the Spring 1986 issue , it was announced that " nonperiod specialization " would be the new emphasis at Duke . Such shifts in focus require new faculty , bringing to Duke Marianna Torgorvnick , a " cultural critic " and Jane Gaines , a " media critic . " The piece on Prof. Gaines was particularly interesting . At one point , she indulged in the sort of logic becoming quite common at Duke : " I have argued that film studies belongs in English departments because this strange presence ... better answers ... the question , ' What is literature ? ' @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a close study of those texts which are not considered literature . " Maintaining that people in " film and television studies ... must find every manifestation of mass culture significant , " she went on to assure the reader that such scholarship is quite respectable : " Now Duke can move ahead with assurance because media studies has established its theoretical pedigree . Academic study of film and television is respectably aligned with the most sophisticated French theories . " No doubt . <p> The Fall 1986 newsletter heralded the hiring of another " couple " : Professors Annabel and Lee Patterson were the result of " another impressive year of recruiting . " It was made clear that the Pattersons were linked not only in marriage , but also in their " commitment " to the " political " study of literature . Annabel Patterson specifically affiliated herself with the " reaction against the reaction against political history . " Readers would perhaps have liked to ask whose political history , but that would be frowned upon , and besides , we are all expected to know the answer @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of the new Duke . The first was a lecture by Prof. Fish on the " irrelevance of theory for practice in sports , literary studies , and the profession of judging . Examples came from legal texts , newspaper articles , and the career of former Baltimore Oriole pitcher Dennis Martinez . " The second ( not totally unrelated , perhaps ) involved the graduate English program : no longer were specific requirements needed to ensure the coverage of historical periods of literature , and comprehensive examinations would cease to be comprehensive and , instead , focus on " a major area . " Further , the foreign language requirement would also be closely tied to the " major area . " It occurred tome that with every reiterated claim of greater diversity and range at Duke , the actual literary and linguistic horizons of its students seemed to narrow . <p> The next three newsletters focused on continued hiring and the kind of " scholarly " activity characteristic of the new Duke . The Fall 1987 issue announced the acquisition of Barbara Herrnstein Smith , who apologized for her @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of herself as " always having been a theorist . " Prof. Smith 's major contribution to " theory " is that all values are " radically contingent . " Also noted was the arrival of some younger academics , including Regina Schwartz , who combined study of the Bible with ( what else ? ) contemporary theory , Michael Moses , whose main concerns were South American fiction and literary studies " within the context of political philosophy , " and Michael Moon , who combined the " New Historicism " and " gay studies . " I then read of John Clum 's several essays on homosexuality , Leigh Deneef 's deconstruction of Thomas Traherne , and Joseph Porter 's explorations of " postfeminist tragedy " in Shakespeare . The highlight of the issue , however , was its list of " visiting professors , " among them a Marxist , a feminist , and " a television theorist with a special interest in soap opera . " <p> Spring 1988 stands out for its coy protest that , despite recent " newspaper accounts , " the English department @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ . Furthermore , it was asserted that the " classics are taught and abundantly , " offering as proof the fact that English majors were required to take a course on either Shakespeare , Chaucer , or Milton . What more could one ask ? <p> What really gets taught at Duke was perhaps more candidly revealed in the Fall 1988 issue . New hires were again noted , and the stars featured were Eve Kosofsky Sedgwick , who was quoted as observing that " if the work does n't have a strong political thrust , I do n't see how it matters . " Such a charge can hardly be leveled against her . Her work centers on " male sexuality , " " central oppressions " in our culture , and " the AIDS epidemic . " What literature Prof. Sedgwick addresses in this worthy scholarship was not revealed , though the 1989-90 newsletter published the titles of two of her papers : " How to Bring Your Kids Up Gay " and " Jane Austen and the Masturbating Girl . " Apparently the classics are not dead at @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , whose interests include " contemporary , marginal literatures . " Despite his brave commitment to the contemporary , he lamented his students ' lack of historical perspective : " The literature of the 60 's and 70 's is ancient history . These are people who first came to social awareness in 1980 if not 1984 . " Compensations , however , do exist for Prof. Ferraro . He is delighted to be in a department , he noted , in which The Godfather is deemed a masterpiece . <p> The latest newsletter ( 1989-90 ) continues to tell the good news about hiring , and we read that Duke has a new star in black studies , two new feminist theorists , and -- my favorite -- a specialist in " daily life . " This learned person is particularly interested in the scholarly contemplation of " aerobics , shopping malls , Barbie dolls , Michael Jackson , and Mickey Mouse . " I do n't know that we should be very surprised that the department 's new Mickey Mouse authority comes to Duke after an appointment in the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ California at Santa Cruz . <p> As tempting as it is to close on this sublime bit of bathos , I really can not do so , for despite its rich comic value , the " new English " at Duke is not finally funny . If $100,000-a-year professors at one of America 's most expensive and " elitist " schools want to posture as good comrades , populists , and the vanguard of class struggle , probably no lasting harm is done -- to them . There are undoubtedly , however , students at Duke who would like to study literature . What they are actually studying is made all too clear in two of the most recent Newsletters . It is noted that Duke graduate students have given a number of papers lately . And what are we to suppose were their topics ? Some tides are indicative : " From Screwballs to Cheeseballs : Comic Narrative and Ideology from Frank Capra to Rob Reiner , " " Fear and Loathing in the Literary Canon . " " The Gynecology of the Closet in The Changeling , " " @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a Gender Paradigm , " and " Kierkegaard , Marxism , and Post-structuralism . " <p> This list is to me inexpressibly sad . Not only is the dreary sameness of the assumptions and preoccupations depressing , but completely or almost completely absent is any sign that the authors of these " works " have had any real exposure to the rich , beautiful , endlessly fascinating , and genuinely " liberating " fullness ( " canonical " and " noncanonical " ) of English and American literature from Anglo-Saxon times to our own . In the final analysis , it is not so much what the Duke English department actually does that matters -- as silly as much of it is -- rather , it is their painful and ultimately absurd desertion of literature as a great human art , and as a great instrument of culture in the Arnoldian sense , that condemns them . <p> By Phillip B. Anderson <p> <p> Phillip B. Anderson is professor of English and chairman of the Department of English at the University of Central Arkansas , Conway , AR 72032 , and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 
##4000352 Section : POINT OF VIEW <p> Should the curriculum include more humanities ? Many thoughtful people think so . They argue that the humanities are needed to help us get back in touch with our essential humanity , regain our moral insight , recover our sense of values , return to our cultural roots , and restore our political traditions. 1 Like the humanities themselves , this argument is inspirational but vague ; and because it is vague , it is dangerous . It leaves many questions unanswered , and this leaves room for people to answer these questions in ways we might not like . <p> Here are some of the questions that need answering . What , exactly , are the " humanities " ? Which courses in humanities will students be required to take ? Why should these courses be preferred to those they will replace ? Who will teach these courses , and whose humanity , moral insight , values , culture , and tradition will they advance ? How will these courses be taught ? I believe that these and similar questions must @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ whether requiring more humanities is a good idea or a bad one . The Vagueness of the Idea of the Humanities <p> If anything can safely be said about this subject , it is that the term humanities is not well defined . Consider the list of courses that will satisfy the humanities requirement in my own university 's so-called core curriculum. 2 This list , which is typical , contains just under a hundred items and is still growing . In addition to the usual courses in literature , classics , history , anthropology , philosophy , and religion , there are also courses in art , music ( both jazz and classical ) , dance , American studies , women 's studies , Latin American studies , communications , political science , speech , film , etc . This is a very heterogeneous and divergent lot . These courses may have what the philosopher Wittgenstein called family resemblance , meaning that A has eyes like B , who has a nose like C , but there is almost certainly no way in which they all resemble each other . @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ long , but that it is too diffuse . No one could object to the richness of choice if it served a clear and coherent educational purpose , but , if it does , who can say what that is ? Certainly not I. Each of these courses may have its value , but the value is different in each case . There does not seem to be anything that all of them have in common . So , there does not seem to be any reason to group them all together and require every student to take one or more . <p> It is sometimes said that the humanities all have in common a concern with values . Accordingly , courses in art and literature treat of things that embody aesthetic values , and courses in feminism or Marxism treat of economic , political , and moral values . Yes , but every human activity , including science and engineering , either treats of or embodies values . Thus , the social sciences treat of values in discussing human behavior , and the physical sciences embody values by preferring evidence @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the exclusive possession of the humanities . <p> We could , of course , try to limit the humanities to particular sorts of values . For example , we could try limiting them to aesthetic values . The humanities would then include nothing but courses in art , music , and literature . Women 's studies and communications would be left out . Yes , but also left out would be the first two parts of Northrop Frye 's famous triad of humanities : philosophy , history , and literature . Why not then simply limit the humanities to Frye 's triad ? Because that would leave nothing out . Philosophy , history , and literature are universal media ; they cover everything . So , once you 've included them , you 've included everything else , too . <p> We could leave out the arts if we limited the humanities to moral values , but we would then have to include women 's studies , black studies , economics , politics , and so on . In fact , social science would now comprise most of the humanities -- @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ desires . <p> Evidently , it is hard to find a characterization of " the humanities " that will limit them to a short and well-defined list of things . In fact , every choice is arbitrary . Although no single principle , rule , or definition determines what counts among " the humanities , " there is a perfectly good explanation and justification for every item on virtually everybody 's list . Humanities Has Added New Meaning with Each Age <p> Why this is so will become evident after we review the history of the concept of the humanities . As this history reveals , the word humanities is a chameleon which has changed its color to suit every age and ideology . In consequence , it has not one well-defined meaning but many different , if overlapping , meanings . <p> So far as I have been able to discover , the idea of the humanities originated in the Renaissance , when scholars tired of medieval theology and other-worldliness distinguished literae humaniores , writings about things human in scale , from literae divinae , writing about things divine in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ been given over to God and the church , most of the down-to-earth writings were in classical Latin or Greek . Therefore , the first humanists were classicists , lovers and scholars of classical literature . More generally , they were admirers of things classical , devotees of classical ( i.e. , Greek and Roman ) literature , art , and culture . <p> Present use of the term humanities still retains some of its original meaning ; but the term has also acquired a very different connotation , one that is in some ways broader , in other ways narrower . <p> First , the broader connotation . Where medieval theology had been dry and logical , the classics were elegant and charming . So , the adjective humanistic soon came to connote not just the subject but also the style of the writing . In fact , style eventually counted for more that content . Whether the writing was about man or God ceased to matter very much ; what mattered was whether it was refined or florid . Hence , humanities now more often denotes what the French @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ anything at all , human or divine . <p> Once this extension of usage came into existence , a still further extension was soon to follow . If what made literature humanistic was its refinement or elegance , then the same could be said of all art , whether literary or not . Accordingly , humanities has come to denote not just poems and stories but all refined art , including painting , music , sculpture , film , and the like . As a result , humanistic now means arty -- in other words , refined , cultivated , and effete . <p> This broadening of the term to include all of the refined arts has been accompanied by a compensating narrowing . In the Renaissance , humanists prized classical discussions of science . One of the greatest discoveries of humanist scholars was a copy of Lucretius ' poem On the Nature of Things , which made known to modem scientists the atomic theory of matter first formulated by Democritus of classical Greece . Also of interest to Renaissance humanists were Roman writings on engineering , governmental administration , and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to adopt the factual , analytical manner of the medieval scholastics , science and technology ceased to count as humanistic . In fact , both science and its technological applications came to be regarded as the embodiment of all things that were not humanistic . C. P. Snow 's " two cultures " came into being , as science became antihumanistic and humanists became antiscientific . <p> The exclusion of things scientific was completed in the nineteenth century , when the German romantics distinguished what they called Geistewissenschaffen , studies of the spirit , from what they called Naturwissenschaffen , studies of the physical world. 4 Believing that a human being is essentially a spiritual , not a physical , being , the Germans reinterpreted the humanities as inspirational studies , the main purpose of which was to influence not the intellect but the will and the emotions . This made theology , which had originally been the very opposite of a humanistic study , into the most important such study . It also meant that science was now formally excluded from the humanities by virtue of its content as well @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that had flowed from science . Accordingly , humanistic now meant things ornamental , inspirational , and cultivated but unscientific and impractical. 5 <p> In summary , the word humanities originally meant the naturalistic writings , then the naturalistic art , of classical Greece and Rome . Later , it signified any form of refined art or writing , and then any form of art or writing that is edifying , inspirational , or entertaining but not analytical , informative , or utilitarian . At one time or another , therefore , humanities has denoted just about anything anybody cares to mention . <p> Given this history , it is no wonder that lists of " the humanities " are so lengthy and diffuse . One might desire to prune these lists , but there is no obvious and principled way to do it . In the history of the term humanities one can find a justification for every item on the list . So , whether he likes it or not , a friend of " the humanities " is committed to them all . The Diverse Values of " @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ diffuse and divergent collection of things ? The customary answer is , again , one that mentions " values . " We teach the humanities , it is said , in order to teach our pupils a sense of aesthetic , moral , political , economic , or intellectual values . Let us now examine this answer . <p> Obviously , it owes a lot to the romantic conception of the humanities . In that conception , the humanities are inspirational rather than scientific studies ; their main function , as the romantics themselves emphasized , is to cultivate not the intellect but the passions and the will . In other words , their business is to inculcate us with certain moral and aesthetic values . Where the sciences teach facts and logic , the humanities are to teach feelings , obligations , and taste . Where the sciences teach us how the world is , the humanities teach us what it ought to be . Where the sciences endeavor to understand the world , the humanities aspire to take the right attitude towards it and make efforts to improve it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ idea is questionable because it leaves out the social sciences , which deal with both facts and values , and overlooks the fact that natural science embodies and teaches the values inherent in a preference for reason and truth . However , let us overlook these difficulties . For the sake of the discussion , let us grant the distinction . How does it help ? <p> So far as I can see , it does not . Here is why : once the topic of values has been raised , we inevitably face the question , " Whose values ? Mine or yours ? " You like Mozart ; I like Monk . Who will we teach our students to like ? You prefer Matisse : I prefer Grandma Moses . Who will we teach our students to prefer ? Jones favors feminism , Smith , a strong family . Which will we teach our students to favor ? Sarah believes in free enterprise , Sam , in socialist equality . Which will we teach our students to believe in ? <p> To some people , the answer will seem @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to prefer what is beautiful to what is ugly , what is good to what is bad , what is true to what is false , and so on . Unfortunately , these abstract terms -- truth , beauty , justice , goodness , etc. -- conceal great intellectual and practical problems . Who gets to decide what is to count as true , beautiful , just , or good ? You , I , or somebody else ? <p> This is no problem where you and I , who share essentially the same values , are designing a curriculum for a private school or university supported by voluntary contributions and attended by people who wish to be taught what we wish to teach them . Designing a curriculum for a public school or university , however , presents a moral difficulty . This arises from the fact that it is contrary to the principles of a free society to compel citizens to pay taxes to support the teaching of values that can not be reconciled with their own consciences and interests ; and it is doubly onerous to compel them @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The public schools are nobody 's private property . They do not belong to any group to do with as it pleases . Rather , they are the property of all who must pay the taxes that support them or submit their children to their tutelage . What Are Our Choices ? <p> What then should we do ? The answer , I think , lies in giving up the idea of using the schools to teach students " values " per se , and insisting instead that they be taught skills . In particular , we can insist they be taught the intellectual skills that used to be known as the liberal arts . I believe that , in the process of learning these valuable skills , students will also automatically acquire some of the most important values , namely , respect for discipline , hard work , reason , truth , honesty , excellence , achievement , civility , etc . There will be no need or room for indoctrination . <p> These remarks will puzzle some readers . It is generally believed that the humanities and the liberal @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ So , it will seem inconsistent to praise the one while condemning the other . It is also widely believed that the main business of teaching the humanities is to refine the tastes and improve the morality and politics of our pupils . So , it will seem self-contradictory to reject doing this while recommending training for citizenship . How the Liberal Arts Differ from the Humanities <p> To resolve these paradoxes , I must now explain how the liberal arts differ from the humanities and why teaching the skills necessary for good citizenship can escape the temptation to engage in political or moral indoctrination . <p> The idea of the liberal arts was invented by the ancient Romans , to whom the word arts meant " skills " and the word liberal signified " free . " Accordingly , the great Roman writers Cicero and Seneca explained that the liberal arts were the intellectual skills needed by free men -- as opposed to the menial skills needed by slaves . Among the liberal arts as thus understood were the skills of calculating , reasoning , reading , writing , and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ responsibility and prerogative , as citizens , to participate in making or approving policy for the republic . In short , the liberal arts were the skills needed for free and effective citizenship . <p> The term liberal arts retained this rich and complex meaning throughout the Middle Ages . In the typical medieval university , the basic studies were the seven artes liberales , which comprised the trivium of logic , grammar , and rhetoric and the quadrivium of arithmetic , geometry , astronomy , and music ( i.e. , poetry ) . Higher education involved the study of more esoteric subjects : revealed philosophy ( i.e. , theology ) , natural philosophy ( i.e. , science ) , and moral philosophy ( i.e. , ethics ) . Anyone who went through this curriculum got a liberal education , one fitting him not to earn a living or enrich himself at a particular occupation , but to fulfill his public responsibilities as a citizen . He could read , write , and reason at a very high level of proficiency . <p> It should now be clear that the liberal @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , the concept of the liberal arts is far better defined . Second , the liberal arts are skills whereas the humanities are subjects . Third , mathematics is one of the most important of the liberal arts , but it is positively excluded by the romantic conception of the humanities . Fourth , although they are intellectual rather than occupational skills , the liberal arts are useful rather than ornamental , utilitarian rather than inspirational ; unlike the humanities as they are presently conceived , the liberal arts can not be equated with the refined arts . Finally , there is no antagonism between the liberal arts and either science or technology . Teaching the Liberal Arts Should Be Our First Priority <p> My contention , broadly stated , is that we ought to concern ourselves first with instruction in the liberal arts . We should make the teaching of the subjects embodied in the humanities , and in the social or natural sciences , a goal of secondary importance to the inculcation of intellectual skill . <p> The reasons are obvious . Everybody needs these skills , but few @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ my own experience as a college teacher confirms , students these days can not read or write or calculate , much less reason effectively . I know from personal experience that we are now graduating with B.A. and B.S. degrees people who can not write grammatical sentences , read and understand paragraphs , calculate simple percentages , or compose a coherently formulated argument -- things many eighth graders could do fifty years ago . This is shocking , it is shameful , and it desperately needs to be corrected . <p> But we are not going to correct it if we continue to fight over whose values to teach . Instead , we shall just distract attention from what truly and most urgently needs to be done , namely , restoring to our students the capacity to reason seriously . <p> The task may seem insuperable , but if we attempt it we have one thing going for us : it is , in fact , an objective that virtually everybody , whatever his political or religious convictions , can support -- because virtually everyone will benefit from its realization . @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ arts -- as much of them as we can get . So , anybody with any sense wants to be able to read and write at as high a level of proficiency as his abilities will allow . <p> For this reason alone , instruction in the liberal arts ought to be one of the main tasks of public education in a free society . Training people in the refined arts ought to come second . So should training in the occupational or vocational arts , as well as training in moral , religious , and political values . <p> Please note that nothing in this proposal either rules out teaching the humanities , the social sciences , or any other subject or denigrates the importance of exposing students to rival values and views of life . It just requires that these be taught with an eye to increasing the student 's level of literacy , numeracy , and general powers of reason . What better way to teach students to read and think than by doing it through Plato , the Bible , Shakespeare , Jefferson , Marx , or @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to take courses which are aimed at influencing their attitudes and conduct , but not at raising their level of intellectual skill . <p> Unfortunately , humanities courses do not always satisfy this standard . In a passionate and eloquent essay on the topic , writer and former teacher Ellen Ashdown has pointed out that many humanities courses in the public junior colleges are designed not to raise the level of student literacy but to accommodate the illiterate student. 7 Such courses use books with lots of pictures in them , and rather than teaching the student to read or write they rub a little high culture off on him while collecting his fees . <p> The universities have little cause to feel superior . To see why not , consider English and history , the two most popular fields in the humanities . When taught correctly , they are excellent vehicles for inculcating the liberal arts ; but they are not always taught in the right way . Teaching the liberal arts is labor-intensive ; it takes time. 8 Professors in the public universities have far too many students to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Thus , as William Arrowsmith pointed out long ago , the professors of English generally leave the teaching of literacy to their graduate students , to whom they teach literature. 9 The professors of history do something similar . They teach great masses of students names and dates in mind-numbing survey courses while graduate students mark the papers . This is not the fault of the professors , who are often doing as best they can under difficult circumstances ; but it nonetheless needs to be corrected . Until it is corrected , we can not automatically expect students to learn the liberal arts from studying English and history . Conclusion <p> The moral of the story is this : an argument can be made for requiring students ( especially in the public schools ) to study courses -- whether in the humanities or not -- when these are taught with a eye to inculcating the liberal arts , the basic intellectual skills that every citizen requires . Little argument can be made , however , for increased study of the humanities where this will have the result of substituting the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the basic skills of the intellect ; and no argument at all in support of using the humanities to indoctrinate students in the moral , religious , or political values of any group . <p> It will be objected that teaching people to read , write , calculate , and reason is the business of the grammar and the high schools ; and so it is . But I believe that the colleges and universities should also teach these skills , albeit at a higher level . Furthermore , the debate over which level should do it is academic . At the moment , neither the grade schools nor the institutions of higher education are teaching the liberal arts . They must both go back to doing so . For reasons that the ancient Romans understood well but we have somehow managed to forget , our preservation as a republic of free citizens may depend on it . <p> This brings us back to politics . As these last remarks suggest , the purpose of teaching the liberal arts is political ; but it is political in the broadest and best @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ competency in the liberal arts is good for the whole political order and everybody in it . Emphasizing the primacy of the liberal arts is , however , certainly not political in the narrow and bad but popular sense of that word : the liberal arts are not partisan ; they do n't favor the program of this political party over that one ; they do n't advance one group 's interests at the expense of another 's . Rather , possessing the liberal arts enables every group to advance its own interests and , thereby , the well-being of the whole . <p> 
##4000357 On 5 April 1990 , the New York Times reported that Dr. Joel Segall , president of Baruch College of the City University of New York , was resigning from his job , following a critical review by the Middle States Association of Schools and Colleges . There was no allegation that Baruch was anything less than an excellent college . In fact , it is widely regarded as one of the four top business colleges in the country and trains almost one out of every three of the certified public accountants working in New York . Rather , the complaint was that there were not enough " minorities " in the faculty and administration and that not enough " minorities " graduated . Disturbing though this is , even more unsettling is the fact that the criticism was concocted by the central offices of the accrediting agency , acting independently of its own guidelines and evaluation team . <p> While it contained some criticisms of Baruch 's curriculum , the public report issued by the evaluation team itself was on the whole quite positive . ( The @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ mentioning ethnic tensions and the lack of minorities on the faculty . The report did not state that accreditation was to be withheld or deferred because of these matters . ) According to procedure commonly followed in accreditation , Baruch was given an opportunity to submit a statement answering the criticisms in the team 's report . Following the college 's response , a still confidential letter from Sarah Blandshei , the chair of the Middle States Association , is said to have indicated that accreditation would be " deferred " because of the " minority " attrition rate and the lack of " minorities " in the administration and faculty . <p> Dr. Howard L. Simmons , executive director of the Middle States Association , acknowledges that under his leadership , the agency has undertaken a new activist role . He has asserted , according to a recent issue of Black Issues in Higher Education , that all universities must be made responsible for the success of " minorities " in higher education. 1 In order to do this , Simmons said in an interview , the faculty and administration @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the student body . " 2 This is part of a broad initiative by Simmons . According to published reports , fifteen to twenty other institutions have also been threatened on these grounds by the association ; Baruch 's is only the first case to become public . <p> The attack on Segall and the Baruch faculty represents an ominous direction taken by accreditation . For the first time , an accrediting agency is criticizing the ethnic composition of a college 's graduating class , as well as making specific complaints about the racial makeup of its faculty and staff . According to a source on the Department of Education 's National Advisory Committee on Accreditation and Institutional Eligibility , such a step is entirely unprecedented . No other accrediting agency has ever undertaken an aggressive role in attempting to impose racial quotas on faculty , administrators , and graduates . <p> In itself , the attempt to control the ethnicity of university personnel is nothing new . In the last twenty years , the concept of affirmative action has evolved into a quota system in which white males are routinely @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ article in the American Scholar. 3 Although deeply threatening to the integrity of the university because they undermine the concept of professional peer review , quotas imposed on personnel committees have been a long time aborning , and it does not appear that they will be easily abolished . Until recently , however , the federal government was the principal agency in this coercion . Now , it appears , the effort has shifted from government to private agencies such as Middle States , accompanied by the notion that henceforth a college may have its accreditation withheld if it does not graduate the right percentages of certain ethnic groups . A Racial Graduation Quota ? <p> When asked if a college could be found delinquent for failing to graduate sufficient numbers of " minority " students , Simmons agreed that Middle States does use an " outcomes-based approach " for granting or withholding its approval . He denied that Middle States has any " hard and fast rules " regarding minority retention rates , indicating there is " never a single standard " in assessing a school 's performance in this @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ from Characteristics of Excellence in Higher Education : Standards for Accreditation , the handbook used by Middle States . In fact , there is no statement whatsoever in that manual concerning minority retention rates . When this was pointed out , Simmons changed his mind and said that accreditation is granted or withheld on a case-by-case basis . " I know that sounds hard to understand , " he admitted , " but that 's how they do it . The team decides differently for each school . " There are " so many factors involved " that there can be " no quantitative standards " for evaluating a college . So much for the objective criteria of accreditation . <p> What is particularly bizarre about Simmon 's line of reasoning is the fact that students at Baruch , regardless of racial and ethnic identity , generally have a much better chance of graduating than elsewhere . Of white freshmen at Baruch , 48 percent graduate in four years , compared to a national average of 40 percent ; 37 percent of black freshman graduate in four years , compared to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ graduate in four years , compared to 42 percent nationwide. 4 ( Only " Hispanics , " a particularly heterogeneous group whose actual composition varies greatly by region , do slightly less well -- 31 percent at Baruch and 35 percent nationwide . ) <p> Apparently , not only have the criteria for " minority retention " been invented for the occasion by Middle States headquarters , but the true numbers have been ignored . It is likely that the criteria are kept deliberately vague in order to increase the arbitrary power of the accreditors . The use of an unstated but de facto racial graduation quota puts university administrators in a vulnerable position , since there is no way to tell whether Middle States will charge them with not having satisfied the goal of graduating sufficient numbers of designated minority groups . The lack of precision permits Middle States to deny that they are seeking any exact outcome , thereby avoiding legal action . At the same time , when it suits them they can use the " outcomes-based approach " as a potential threat to colleges seeking accreditation . @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ real racial graduation quota , residents and deans will be inclined to design programs to increase graduation prospects for protected groups . <p> Middle States can thus obtain the desired outcome without ever having to invoke the threat explicitly , and all the while remain protected from public scrutiny . Simmons admits having adopted the same tactic with many other institutions , but because of the secrecy involved in the accreditation process , he has not had to be held publicly accountable . However , in this he may have violated federal regulations . The Department of Education has criteria for recognition of accrediting agencies , one being that an agency " not mislead the public " regarding an " institution 's or program 's educational effectiveness . " 5 Can Whites Teach Blacks , and Vice Versa ? <p> The other criticism leveled against Baruch is that is does not employ enough " minorities . " In reality , this argument is absurd , since many Baruch professors are Jewish and non-white Asians . But in education-speak , such individuals are not defined as " minorities . " Middle States @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ non-Hispanic whites and not enough blacks for a student body that includes many blacks and Hispanics . Thus , the broader question at issue is whether or not white instructors can adequately teach " minority " students . The " diversity " of a student body , according to Middle States , must be matched by a corresponding " diversity " of faculty and administrators . This belief is so widespread amongst academic administrative cognoscenti that few question it . When the logic of such a concept is challenged , the usual response is that a white professor can not be as good a " role model " for a black student as a black professor . <p> In fact , there is little or no systematic evidence for this argument . In social psychology , the notion of " role model " is correctly applied to the basic socialization of children , when explaining how in childhood we " identify " with others , particularly parents , siblings , and peers , and choose certain persons ( particularly those of the same sex ) on whom to model ourselves . @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ may be as likely to " de-identify " or want to be the opposite of a peer or a sibling or a parent . It is also highly questionable whether this process takes place after puberty . At most , therefore , while one may suggest that professors can serve as inspirational mentors to college students , no evidence exists that such individuals must be of the same sex , race , or cultural background . The idea of " role model , " in short , is fraudulently applied in the field of higher education . <p> Indeed , if such a concept did make sense , it would have exactly the opposite results of what Middle States ostensibly desires . It would mean not only that black students should be counseled to take courses only from black professors , but also that white students should not take courses from black professors . If black students need black professors as role models to spur them to greater levels of achievement , white students require and deserve the same kind of encouragement . Taken to its logical conclusion , the " @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ racial segregation in higher education . If black students respond best to black professors , they ought to maximize their chances by enrolling at all-black colleges . The same would apply , mutatis mutandis , to white students . <p> Another justification for the use of racial quotas in hiring is the suggestion that white professors are somehow harder on black students . As closet , or unconscious , racists , white faculty are , according to this argument , responsible for the higher dropout rate of blacks . In point of fact , there is no evidence for greater white professorial bias against black students . Dr. June O'Neill , a former member of the United States Commission on Civil Rights and professor at Baruch 's Center for Business and Government , has done extensive research on the determinants of black and white high school students ' achievements when they are young adults . Black students who have black teachers tend to do less well in terms of verbal aptitude , but this is because black faculty tend to be less well prepared . By itself , a teacher 's @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ It is doubtful , however , that Simmons and his allies are inspired by evidence or logic . There is no reason to believe that much reflection was done on the scientific basis for their criticisms and suggestions . Rather than call for measures that will actually improve the quality of education at the institutions they investigate , they seek symbolic moves that produce positive media images . Future Implications of Accreditation Quotas <p> In the classic accreditation process , institutions are evaluated on the basis of the stringency or laxity of their educational standards . In the past , if a college was found to be too lax , accreditation was withheld , or perhaps conditionally granted pending correction of certain deficiencies . But now , for the first time , a college 's accreditation has been " deferred , " not because its standards are too low , but because they are too high . An institution of higher learning is being directed to arrange its faculty , administration , and curriculum so that a de facto racial graduation quota can be filled . Aside from some serious issues @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the abolition of institutional autonomy and faculty control over the hiring process . <p> It is no coincidence that this new and arbitrary direction has been taken by a private accrediting agency . In 1989 the Supreme Court issued a series of decisions that seriously undermined the ability of government to require institutions to use racial and sexual quotas in hiring and promotions . Though this was a serious setback for those who would like to see a political system governed by racial and sexual entitlement , they have evidently regrouped . <p> For example , under the sponsorship of Senators Kennedy and Hawkins , the Civil Rights Bill of 1990 currently being argued in Congress would reimpose on employers the burden of proving that they did not discriminate against minorities in hiring . Since it is virtually impossible to prove that something has not occured , the result will be that employers ( including colleges and universities ) will be obliged to adopt quotas in hiring in order to forestall potential lawsuits . This is particularly likely because the same legislation will require employers to pay the cost of employees @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ discrimination free of charge . <p> On the level of academic rhetoric , the tactic has been to substitute " diversity " for the now-tainted " affirmative action , " since it is widely recognized that the latter has produced discriminatory preferential hiring . Surveys show that most blacks , as well as most whites , are opposed to preferential treatment for blacks . Using " diversity " sounds better because the term is vague and it is hard to say one is against it . But the Baruch case shows what " diversity " truly means ; it is simply old wine in new bottles . <p> That there is no logical or empirical justification for racial quotas in hiring or graduation should not need saying . But Simmons and his allies are not governed by logic or facts ; they are driven by a sense of moral righteousness that is impervious to any argument . Rather than conforming to consistent and objective standards of excellence , Simmons makes up the rules as he goes along . Rather than appealing to the intellect , Simmons tugs at people 's basest @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ education . <p> 
##4000358 Recently I read a fine article by Prof. Walter Berns , called " The Core as an Education for Natural Aristocrats " ( see Academic Questions , Summer 1989 ) . It 's a Jeffersonian idea and I agree with it , but for some reason I find that I spend much more time worrying about that oxymoron , the natural bourgeoisie , than about any kind of aristocracy , natural or conventional . <p> It 's true that students at liberal arts colleges , even in Ohio , have a kind of aristocratic assurance that their lives will be successful , and that they will do important things in the world . Also , they tend to enjoy something of the high-minded innocence of the well-reared and protected which encourages them to love learning for its own sake rather than for material utility . But , to belabor the obvious , above all they are creatures of liberal democracy and , as such , irredeemably bourgeois . They pretend to be relativists but are really believers in rights and individual responsibility . Underneath the high-toned moralism , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the lives they will lead when they graduate will overwhelmingly be bourgeois lives , composed of the usual professional and commercial careers , condominiums , divorces , therapies , and retirements . <p> Of course , not only do liberal educators know this , but on the whole it drives them wild . As we all know , by and large liberal arts professors belong to that strain of the bourgeoisie which dislikes itself ; hence the really powerful intellectual movements on contemporary campuses are all characterized by bourgeois-bashing . What holds " humanistic , " i.e. , aesthetic , Nietzschean Marxism together is hatred of the human products of commercial republics . Feminism , which in the larger society has strong elements that are irreproachably bourgeois ( wages , equality , self-fulfillment ) , in the prestigious universities is magnetized to utopian , antibourgeois speculations about overcoming the " tyranny " of gender or " patriarchy . " Deconstruction , despite , and indeed because of its air of a political cool , mocks the square epistemological naivete of workaday life . The crusade against the dominance of " Western @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ students to something really exotic , and thus to destroy their bourgeois complacency . Pedagogical politics is thoroughly antibourgeois , whether it is engaged in purifying democracy of its bourgeois taint or creating idealists who are to work for a better nonbourgeois and perhaps nonliberal world . <p> Yet there is something paradoxical and self-defeating to the point of comedy in the way this all works out . To understand this , one has to remember why the bourgeois got such a bad reputation in the first place . This is not self-evident . In certain passages Adam Smith , for example , glorifies the honesty , straightforwardness and independence of the bourgeois . Where the courtly spaniel fawns and begs for a bone of patronage , the manly bourgeois plunks his hard-earned money down and " trucks " for his wherewithal . There are still some students like this , mostly economics majors , who simply can not be made to feel guilty about maximizing their utilities . Still , most of the students I see resemble the bourgeoisie Rousseau denounces and Moliere lampoons , a bourgeoisie intimidated by aristocratic @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the bourgeois is a creature of cities , but not really a citizen , just a lover of private life , peace , and commerce . Alienated from his original human nature as a happy , sappy , witless beast , he has not achieved a coherent second nature . That is why " the natural bourgeoisie " is an oxymoron ; the bourgeois is convention incarnate . This makes him extremely nervous and he lives , like Moliere 's M. Jourdan , according to the opinions of others . His natural self-love sours into amour propre , poisoned by fears about his neighbors ' judgment of his lawn , his car , his politics , and his soul . The vice of vanity constitutes his inner life . He wants to be liked , even if not well-liked , if only someone will tell him what rules to conform to . In the end , most do not go as far as M. Jourdan ; most do not try to transform themselves utterly into aristocrats or -- as is more typical today -- proletarians or bohemians . But mostly the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ conscience . <p> I find that students fit the pattern pretty well . The smugness which their teachers find so exasperating is only an attitude , struck for lack of a better , and easily gives way to self-contempt and cynicism . Last year I heard the actress Jody Foster , recently graduated from Yale , interviewed on a morning news show . The interviewer asked Ms. Foster if playing a rape victim in a film had enabled her to relive the real victim 's plight . Of course not , came the reply , to imagine that would just be " bourgeois . " I gather from this that Ms. Foster had learned her lessons well at Yale . She had learned that " bourgeois " is a synonym for philistine , fake , and vulgar . <p> But did learning this make her less bourgeois ? She may think so , but , to judge by the students I see , she would be wrong . Contempt for the bourgeoisie is in fact a classic and unattractive bourgeois trait that today 's liberal education tends merely to aggravate . @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ frequently assumes the character of a pathological , " passive aggressive " relationship . On the surface , one parmer constantly exhorts , denounces , and edifies while the other heaps ashes on his head , confesses , and grovels . Really , however , the apparent victim , in this case the student , remains quite untouched , absorbs the critique into a preexisting pattern of self-blame and determination to resist , and often succeeds in revenging himself in typical passive aggressive ways by constantly offering hope of reform and constantly frustrating it . Real liberal education is thus twice blocked : first by the genuine , though hidden , resentment felt against what liberal education appears to be , and second by the students ' delusions that they have overcome their bourgeois limitations when they have merely intensified them . <p> Of course , the question Rousseau raises about the bourgeois is a version of the question we are treating here . There is indeed something defective about the bourgeois as a citizen , precisely because of his irony and anxiety , which are inextricably attached to his privatism @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ bourgeois wavers between gestures of " commitment " and gestures of cynicism , between bursts of indignant enthusiasm ( for drugs today , against them tomorrow ) and retreats into passivity . The middle position between these gestures which , knowing themselves as gestures , are also done in bad faith , is a moderation essentially helpless , unguided by principle . Argument can lead nowhere : Should we interfere with other governments ? No . What about South Africa ? That 's different . Should we protect freedom of speech ? Yes . What about racist speech ? Well ... <p> It seems to me that ever since Rousseau there has been a great emerging argument in the West about how to ennoble and edify the bourgeoisie . Humanist Marxists , socialist communitarians , teachers of republican virtue , and even , though secretly I think , the overtly unedifying literary critics are all engaged in the task . Of course , as Allan Bloom has reminded us , liberal education always must balance against the prejudices of the regime , partly for the sake of the regime but mostly @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ may not understand itself as essentially or primarily edifying . <p> Yet it seems to me that under current circumstances the argument between thought for its own sake and for political and moral edification is largely moot . This is because , as far as I can tell , all efforts at edification are failures on their own terms precisely because they are sensed , however dimly , as efforts at edification rather than real education . The contemporary version of anti-bourgeois moralizing fails with particularly comic aplomb because it plays right into those bourgeois traits it seeks to overcome . But the more serious nineteenth-century version , which had its roots in German classicism 's project of aesthetic education , failed as well . <p> Unlike contemporary moralism , which conceals itself as open-mindedness , the nineteenth-century version sought to combat mean-spirited anxiety directly . By holding heroic examples to the bourgeois for inspection and emulation , the bourgeois was supposed to become nobler , his vulgar tastes refined , his self-regarding passions generously extended . <p> In Schiller 's Don Carlos , written years before he developed the theory @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ practice , we have the classic test case . The play 's apparent hero , the Marquis Posa , is a good eighteenth-century liberal set in despotic , unenlightened times . He is presented as both noble and democratic , a citizen of the world and a loving friend , a model to the high-minded young of the new , more egalitarian world . <p> But a careful reading of the play shows Posa to be a far more ambiguous character than his edifying appearance , a bad friend and an incompetent politician , motivated by vanity . The true greatness of the play depends on that more careful reading . Yet Schiller 's intent seems to have been to allow the edifying , moralizing reading to be generally accepted . The consequence was that the nobility of the example became unreal . Posa and other Schillerian heroes became hollow plaster casts of classical statuary which could be filled with any political content . Hence those horrible monographs one can still find in card catalogs on Schiller the Nationalist , Schiller the Socialist , Schiller the National Socialist . The ennobled @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , understood it to be a gesture devoid of content . Hence , in part , the failure of high German culture to create a sufficiently responsible , politically decent bourgeoisie , a failure betokened in many old war movies by the figure of the sensitive , piano-playing German officer who still , justly , gets shot at the end . <p> The most edifying education that middle class Americans can receive , it seems to me , is the one that is the least overtly edifying , the least concerned to hector them or remake them , the one that is most concerned with setting out the matters of fact about themselves and the world . Trivial though this suggestion may appear , its implications may not be . <p> What would such an education look like ? It would share with the contemporary " diversity " movement the goal of letting students understand that their habitual customs and tastes are not simply natural but a product of prior choices that they must either affirm or reject . That means it would have to make available to them the Other @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ way . Starting with a polemical animus against what the students presumably are , one teaches a wide variety of texts , taken out of the context of highly developed cultures , which are then made comprehensible by a hopelessly Western , if antibourgeois , analysis . The result is gesture and costume . Like those Nobel Hurons and Compassionate Pashas the eighteenth-century Enlightenment loved so dearly , the student sees the Other dressed in exotic garb , but he is really looking in the mirror and all he ever sees is himself . Thus he thinks he is learning " non-Western values , " when in fact it is only in a particular part of the West that faiths are thought of as " values . " Because he does not know himself he can not know the Other and thus can not know himself through the Other . Adding Fanon to the canon in no way rescues students from the grasp of Dead White European Males ; it merely adds a couple of outfits to the great historical fashion show to go with , say , the guitar of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The alternative would be to start with the West , not tormented by the bizarre dogma that everyone , from Aristotle to Augustine , was really just confirming the goodness of the American status quo . There students discover versions of the good , human types , which both distress and attract them : honor-loving warriors , contemplation-loving philosophers , God-fearing prophets and mystics , serious , warlike relativists , irrationalist scientists . They come to see for themselves what they are , what their lives are and generally will be like . As they reflect on their own responses to the arguments they are faced with , they come to understand the bourgeois not as a historical accident or , as Ms. Foster was taught , a social solecism , but as the product of a very serious choice that has its strengths and limitations . <p> On this basis , they can , if they are willing to expend the costs in time and energy , study a non-Western culture in a serious way , learning the language , taking its account of the good as seriously as they @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ I suspect it will be much easier in most cases to find the way to the samurai ideal from the Greek gentleman described by Aristotle than from the contemporary antibourgeois bourgeois prejudice which shudders at the very notion of rank , or to find the way to Asian religion from a serious study of Augustine than from the contemporary dogmas of those who understand religion only as a manifestation of " culture . " <p> On this basis , too , students can , I think , become better citizens of a liberal democracy . They learn how to escape from the plight of M. Jourdan , alternating helplessly between the attitudes of immense self-satisfaction and total anxiety . It is not that they are freed from irony about themselves . On the contrary , their irony will be far deeper because it will not have the phony salvation of progressive self-righteousness to offer it temporary and inadequate relief . They know much better than before just how far they are from what is truly excellent . But this knowledge , partly because it is knowledge , their knowledge , need @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ one 's own shortcomings is part of one 's life , one 's possession , and not a perpetual damnation by some unappeasable figure of authority . In those circumstances , it makes sense to try to change oneself from inside , to approximate standards that are not merely one 's own but which one has made one 's own , without regard to the opinions of others . <p> This is of course what those who sought to ennoble the bourgeoisie were after ; it is at the heart of the Kantian project that even now , in scientific disguise as Kohlbergian psychology , heavily influences the schools . But that end can not be held up as an ideal or hypostatized into a standard . If the end is already known , if we communicate , however subtly , that becoming more sensitive , or a more virtuous citizen , or a despiser of bourgeois vulgarity , or even an autonomous moral being is the goal of education , then that education degenerates into edification . Only if all the cards are put on the table can students , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and hot gospeling are constitutive of their bourgeois lives , emerge from the crippling irony and anxieties that are at root the same thing , whether they express themselves as cynicism or dogmatism . Only then can students become what they are , which is a necessary step to becoming something better than they are as citizens , as human beings , and yes , as members of the bourgeoisie . <p> <p> By Fred Baumann <p> <p> Fred Baumann is associate professor of political science at Kenyon College , Gambier , OH 43022 . <p> 