Tag: Education

• Building and branding a student

  An interview with Xyla Foxlin.

  source

  In this interview with Xyla Foxlin, sophomore at Case Western University, I want to explore the budding engineer’s philosophy and perspective of education. Throughout her life, Xyla has made innovative achievements both academically and personally. She’s cultivated a purpose for herself while confronting questions and challenges, including the value of a college education and the intersection of engineering and art.

  Hussain: What made you interested in engineering?

  XF: I love building things, designing things, and working with my hands. I’ve always been interested in art, and I still view engineering as just another form of art with a technical spin. But in a nutshell, I think robots are the coolest thing ever and my focus is in robotics.

  Hussain: Tell me about Parihug. What is it and what’s so special about it?

  XF: Parihug is a pairable teddy bear that allows you to hug someone from anywhere in the world. A breakthrough in telecommunication, these teddy bears are accessible haptic toys; a plush toy that is designed to escape the uncanny valley and help children and adults alike build relationships with loved ones far away. When one bear is hugged, a suite of soft, fabric-based, analog sensors alerts the bear, sending a signal to its mate over the internet, and sending hugs across thousands of miles.
  
  Hussain: You mentioned you’re almost “in college just for a sheet of paper.” In some sense, it might be true that you are in college “just for a sheet of paper.” What makes you think this way?

  XF: I think everyone learns very differently, and academia only caters to very specific learning styles. It frustrates me that we are only supposed to learn and think in certain ways and this mentality pushes people out of STEM and even college in general very frequently. In today’s society though, a degree is expected, so I’m just here to get that. I do my learning out of the classroom.

  

  
  Hussain: Some have criticized the idea that college should be a place to prepare students for future careers and be economically productive. Do you think this purpose (to use college in order to be economically productive) has any negative effects on students, society, or anything else? If so, have you ever experienced these negative effects?

  XF: I think certain colleges do this very well, and some don’t. Colleges have a focus – vocational schools or polytechnic universities do just that – prepare students for future careers. Research and theory based universities focus on preparing students for research and academia. I personally prefer the polytechnic attitude, but that’s simply because it is what works better for me. To each their own, I think the important thing is that students can have options.

  Hussain: You say you see engineering and art as the same thing. Could you tell us more about what you mean by this?

  XF: Art and engineering have the same founding principles: they’re a reaction to observations of the world. Many concepts found in art rely on the same principles of physics that engineers have built their foundations on. Both require creativity and I do believe that art training should be a requirement for engineers.
  
  Hussain: Tell us a book you think everyone should read.

  XF: “Walt Disney Imagineering: A Behind the Dreams Look At Making the Magic Real”

  February 1, 2016

  Education, Science

  ---

• Stories that destroy

  Read this article in the Indiana Daily Student here…

  January 25, 2016

  Education

  ---

• How to start a blog the right way – Less is more

  Take charge of the bare necessities to be a good writer.

  Why should I blog?

  Blogging lets you express yourself. You can carve out your own niche and create a home. You can make a statement and show others what you want to show. You can understand the true purpose behind what you love (whether you’re a college student or a tenured professor) and even help others find more meaning in their lives. For example, PhD students often write about their struggles in order to help themselves and others approach those issues. Unlike, for example, a social media website, blogging gives you much more freedom for expression and design. While blogging offers a lot of benefits, it is very difficult to gain momentum and develop key qualities of writing (e.g., persistent, high-quality, original, authentic, etc.) that you need.

  When I started blogging in the summer of 2014, I wanted a place to write about my scientific research, but, as time went on, I wrote about my other academic interests. I didn’t have much of a reason for doing so other than the fact that I loved writing, but, as I got involved more (like with the Indiana Daily Student), it turned into a professional profile and place where others can learn.

  Having said that, though blogging may have been popular a decade ago, it’s not as widely used as social media. You should think about whether or not the medium of blogging is truly right for you.

  What should I write about?

  Write about what you love and what you’re good at. It could be science, sports, literature, politics, or anything. You can write about personal things, too, if that’s what you want to share with your audience. I guarantee you that, if you develop skills and cultivate a passion for it, then you can gain control over some overarching purpose with your blog and help you in the long-run. For example, you might start writing about simple noteworthy political events, but, as time goes on, you may develop an interest in U.S.-Russia relations or global economic issues. Don’t pigeonhole yourself early on, but, as you grow, you’ll find more specific interests.

  “Less is more” when it comes to resources. Make content quality a priority over popularity. Visit high-quality media (I particularly enjoy Arts and Letters Daily, and 3 Quarks Daily) and abandon what doesn’t meet your standards. Stay away from the popular news and magazine sites if their quality isn’t good.

  Do I need social media?

  If you want to, use it wisely.

  I’ve avoided social networks (Facebook, Linkedin, Twitter, etc.) for most of my academic career. I’ve registered accounts on a few of them when professionals require me to do so (e.g., if a professor needs to get in touch with me via Linkedin). As is the case with many writers, social media has been a love-hate relationship: I want as many people to read my blog as possible, but the medium of social networks doesn’t guarantee the type of experience I desire. It lacks the immersive context while promising that we can be more “social” with a social network identity. Many of the best scientists and researchers avoid social media for various reasons, as well, and some might attribute some of their success to this fact.

  Besides, when there are so many factors that determine success of a blog (e.g., content quality, popularity of the subject you write about, uniqueness, etc.), it’s very difficult to accurately determine whether or not social networks actually benefits your blog. It could be the case that social networks are more of a “medium,” just like any other form of communication, and choosing to abstain from social networks doesn’t mean you’re missing out on its benefit, but, rather, choosing to obtain benefit from other areas. It could be that, if you abstain from social media, you’re actually exposing yourself more to other forms of communication.

  The choice is yours whether or not you will use social media. But, if you do so, make sure your communication is meaningful and descriptive. Remember, “less is more” means you can benefit more from fewer media.

  Where do I go from here?

  It is hard to really make a purpose or mission from blogging. A lot of times you might feel like you’re writing about what you want to, but not really getting anything from it. Similar to trying to get famous in Hollywood, there is a lot of competition to getting noticed on the Internet. You might feel like your efforts are going to waste or it’s just not worth it. If you think blogging would be cool, it’s best to start writing about what you love and, from time to time, think about where you’re going and what you’ve done to get there. If you realize it’s not something you can comfortably pursue, then so be it. Blogging is what you make of it.

  They say that the wise man isn’t the one who says “yes” to everything, but the one who says “no” to everything. To be a great person you shouldn’t try to do everything nor should you prioritize popularity and marketability over quality and authenticity. That means learning how to choose a few things (whether they’re social media sites or news sources) that meet your standards. After all, “less is more.”

  But, if you haven’t started blogging already, you should definitely consider starting. 

  December 25, 2015

  Education

  ---

• We need philosophers – and the liberal arts too

  David – The Death of Socrates

  Read this article in the Indiana Daily Student here….

  December 11, 2015

  Education, Philosophy

  ---

• Never Let Schooling Interfere with Education

  “The Education of Jupiter” Jacob Jordaens

  As students, many of us struggle to realize the true gifts of a college education. We might learn and education ourselves for other purposes such as preparing for future careers, earning good grades, developing professional “skills”, and other reasons, but none of them come close to what really matters when we learn about things. In reality, a career-focused education might not even be the best way to prepare for a career, good grades might not teach you everything you should understand from a course, and professional skills might just be a way to replace important skills with marketability. For these reasons, it’s clear we need a better understanding of what it means to learn and what’s really important from our education. As students, it’s our duty to emphasize the “purpose,” whatever it may be, and meditate on these values as a 21st-century philosophical inquiry.

  Before I continue, I must clarify what I mean by a “purpose” of college. If we take the “purpose” of college to be some sort of “personal fulfillment,” then the question of “what is the purpose of education” is very trivial and becomes some sort of search for a “feeling.” But we can explore a non-personal version of “meaning” that explains our actions as students with an ethical dimension (such as in regards to moral or rational norms). We can talk about what a student “should” or “shouldn’t” in line with what’s important in college. For example, if one may suggest, we could explore a utilitarian approach based off deontological (moral rules) reasons for action that maximize our benefit from education (ie., if these purposes that students have give the greatest benefit, then those purposes are the “moral rules” that students “should” adhere to.) This way, we would fulfill the purpose of an education in the most “efficient” way possible, if such efficiency is defined this way. In other words, we can lay down different frameworks for decision-making based off our “purpose” of an education.

  In addition, when speaking about these issues, it’s important have to be as diplomatic and courteous as possible in our discourse. Inevitably, there are problems students face and attitudes/behaviors that are harmful that we wish to fight, but we do not want students to approach these issues in way that they are attacked, condemned, or hurt in any way to their dignity. Unfortunately, everyone interprets things differently. But I do think that if we are as diplomatic as possible (ie., constructive criticism, qualifying viewpoints, acknowledging alternative opinions, etc.), then we can make the best impression.

  But what’s wrong with our purpose?

  If we don’t explore the true reasons why we are learning, we subject ourselves to an atmosphere that lacks humanism, curiosity, aesthetics, ethics, empathy, other values necessary for education or the workforce. Classrooms become stripped of values and reduced to places of “handing out a grade”As students and citizens, we separate into distinct academic cultures, and we become hostile to new ideas and thoughts that we’re not familiar with. 

  Similarly, training students solely for future careers doesn’t seem possible nor effective (at least, prima facie). We don’t know what problems the future will hold or what skills will make us successful in the future. And, when only searching for things that will help us in the future, we are myopically cutting off value from things we cannot immediately observe and determine. For example, a student may choose to major in computer science because he or she believes it will offer immediately lucrative technical skills for a career, but he or she might not realize other skills from fields in which benefits are not as easily noticeable. The humanities (and other liberal arts areas) suffer the most, since our utilitarian purposes may not account for those areas enough. And, in the short four years of a college career, there’s no way we can ever learn all the things necessary to address the problems of the future. 

  On the most personal level, we suffer from increased burnout, negative mental health effects, and a loss of purpose in our lives. Oh, and also, we become very boring people. No one likes boring people.

  Well, how do we approach this issue?

  The best way to approach the issue is to talk about it. We can promote discussion, writing, ethical questions, critiquing of ourselves through our activities and organizations. We should think about what’s most important and why those things are important to us, as opposed to other things. For example, we say we want to get good grades while we’re in college, but what makes “good grades” something that is more praiseworthy than, say, knowledge of things beyond the course syllabus (such as the philosophy of physics that is not covered in a physics course). And, if those reasons why those things are more praiseworthy lead you into arguments that are not in line with your purpose of college, then why? Does that have any effects on you or others? If all you’re getting from a physics course is understanding how to solve equations, then maybe you need something more, such as knowing how to think like a physicist or what value science has. 

  “You must never let schooling interfere with education” – Grant Allen, science writer. (‘Eye versus Ear,’ in ‘Post-Prandial Philosophy,’ p 129) The quote is often mistakenly attributed to Mark Twain.

  We can always emphasizing General Education requirements and the Humanities for what value they should have, but as long as the value from those things extends beyond simple “requirements.” If your required ethics course doesn’t teach you the important values and virtues of free thought necessary for growth, then it might as well be another item on the checklist. But if it’s something you’re willing to ponder and reflect upon, then it might have some value to you. 

  Also, writing exercises have been shown to promote positive effects, especially among subjugated groups.

  What should we ask ourselves?

  There are questions we can ask ourselves to guide our introspection and reflection of ourselves. (I know some of these are big questions but we can start with smaller, simpler ones)

  Basic value:

  -What is well-roundedness?

  -What is the purpose of volunteering? 

  -What are your intentions or motives when you volunteer? 

  -What is professionalism? 

  -How does what you do prepare you for the future?

  -What skills do you obtain from your education/experience?

  Self-affirmation:

  -What is important to you?

  -Why are those things important to you? Is there anything in common among them?

  -How are you going to achieve it?

  -Why is it that you can do that?

  Education:

  -What type of experience do you want to gain from your classes?

  -What type of introspection can you do?

  -What larger meaning is there? How do the things that you learn fit into a bigger picture?

  -What is the purpose of your education?

  What can I read to learn more?

  Here are some readings I’ve personally enjoyed.

  Academia:

  Terry Eagleton “The Slow Death of the University”

  Paulo Freire “Pedagogy of the Oppressed”

  Charles Weingartner and Neil Postman “Teaching as a Subversive Activity“

  William Deresiewicz “Excellent Sheep”

  Jackson Lears “Liberal Arts vs. Neoliberalism”

  Martha Nussbaum “Not for Profit”

  Philosophy:

  Terry Eagleton “The Illusions of Postmodernism”

  Wendy Brown “Undoing the Demos: Neoliberalism’s Stealth Revolution”

  Bernard Williams “Philosophy as a Humanistic Discipline”

  And, until next time, keep fighting the good battle.

  December 6, 2015

  Education

  ---

• A Philosophy of Life at IU: On Volunteering, Leadership, and Well-roundedness

  “The really important kind of freedom involves attention and awareness and discipline, and being able truly to care about other people and to sacrifice for them over and over in myriad petty, unsexy ways every day. That is real freedom. That is being educated, and understanding how to think.” – David Foster Wallace

  When David Foster Wallace addressed the graduating seniors at Kenyon College (like he has done so at several other universities), he made sure to instill ideas of personal growth and meaning in the way we live our lives. Much more important than the actual content we know or the money we make, he encouraged students to embrace the uncomfortable ideas, question ourselves, and develop a keen critical awareness. These skills, many of which of central to the liberal arts education, help us in whatever future careers we choose.

  While college freshman nowadays worry more about getting a job, making money, and preparing for graduate school rather than developing a meaningful philosophy of life, everyone wonders how to live a compassionate life. Though we all want to put a roof over our heads someday and have a reasonably comfortable life, that doesn’t mean that we should approach college as a business. We shouldn’t be so quick to seek utilitarian value, economic materialism, or scientific positivism in our work. We, college students, live in system with many assumptions and axioms about what makes us amazing people. We shouldn’t adhere to them dogmatically, but, instead, think about them critically. In this moment, volunteering, leadership, and well-roundedness are a few examples that come to mind.

  Why do we volunteer? Everyone can give many answers. We want to help others. We want to gain skills to become better people. We want to develop ethical, humanistic qualities. In many cases, there is something that we want to get out of volunteering. We might choose to work at a food shelter because we can put that on our resume or spend time at a senior citizen home so we can earn scholarships for graduate school.

  Seen this way, volunteering is a business. And it’s a problem.

  Volunteering needs to be about the value and morals we understand from our experiences. When religious doctrine encourages followers to aid the poor and spend time in charity, many of those followers would agree that they do not do so for the purpose of getting into heaven, but, rather, for more “noble” goals (such as becoming closer to God, making the world a better place, etc.) A lot of the best scientists, philosophers, poets, or anyone of any field understand that, in order to be the best, you shouldn’t work for the sake of getting a reward, but, rather, for the sake of working itself. Similarly, we should approach volunteering the same way. We need to volunteering without succumbing to the “rat race” of filling up lines on a resume or something similar. (As though virtues and morals could be determined through unskilled labor and a number of hours!) But, regardless of any experience we face, many of us want some sort of reward from volunteering. And this isn’t volunteering; it’s employment.

  To understand what volunteering is, we need better ways of understanding our volunteering experiences. Take, for example, volunteering internships/opportunities in third-world nations. Many of us boast these “life-changing”, “eye-opening.” But we don’t gain understanding of the harsh reality of the world when we’re protected by our invulnerable institutions for our own “business-like” benefit. Instead, we pamper ourselves that we’re making a difference and becoming moral human beings. In reality, real change in human beings doesn’t come from flying to new countries or dying for a cause; it comes from living humbly. Similarly, becoming a truly moral human being isn’t caused by your experience building houses for Habitat for Humanity nor engaging in clinical volunteer programs in Ghana; it comes from your deliberate, self-reflective changes to yourself on a day-to-day basis, many of which volunteering experiences may help you do. Like Wallace said, we do not obtain “meaning” from other places, but, rather, we create our own meaning in life.

  Leadership is another concept that has similar concerns. When we talk about “leadership”, we often think about positions in organizations that involve responsibilities such as programming, networking, organizing, and communicating. We can get involved in clubs, sports, or services But there was something we’ve all taken unquestioningly. With student organizations, programs, and activities promising “leadership experience” that will be given to us, how can we call it “leadership” if it’s something that we must receive from something higher than us?

  We mustn’t take “well-roundedness” for granted, either. Colleges and scholarship programs have drilled the ambiguous, ill-defined phrased “well-roundedness” into our skulls. But what does it mean? Some might say “well-roundedness” is about being good at things outside of the classroom. That could mean we have to play a sport, learn an instrument, etc., but that doesn’t tell us much about who we are. That just means we’re doing certain things when we’re not studying. Other might tell us “well-roundedness” means that, while grades are important, there are other qualities about us. But it’s still difficult to identify distinct, quantifiable skills that give rise to who we are. We might say there are “networking skills”, “social skills”, “communication skills”, “professional skills”, etc., and, as long as you commit to certain activities that are different from another you’ll gain those skills. Seen this way, those skills become the “goals” of well-roundedness. But there are still questions as to how we achieve those skills themselves. And, no matter how intrinsic we think those skills are to us, the university still encourages us to manufacture ourselves into them. Are those “skills” artificial?

  A few days ago, University of Chicago poet Rosanna Warren visited Bloomington to host a reading session at a local arts & gifts shop. Though I’m no poetry aficionado, I was blown away by her translation of contemporary and historical Italian work but also her writing on life in America. When I spoke to her about the philosophy of life for college students, we spoke about how the universities have become militarized and business-driven. But, out of our conversation, one piece of her advice stuck with me:

  “Resist!”

  “The human mind doesn’t like to be so boxed in.”

  I think the way we become moral human beings and prepare for the rest of the world should be approached in a different way. Only through the value of the liberal arts education can we develop meaningful philosophies of life. With the freedom of studying humanities, science, arts, and anything else for nothing but the purpose of studying those things, we understand the way people think. We become better, more productive people through those simple methods. And we can understand that knowledge has more to offer than just a way to make money.

  As Wallace made it clear, the liberal arts cliché about teaching you how to think is “actually shorthand for a much deeper, more serious idea: learning how to think really means learning how to exercise some control over how and what you think.” At the end of the day, our extracurriculars, activities, and everything else don’t tell us anything other than what we get out of them. We need to develop the type of awareness to choose how we construct meaning. That’s how we develop a philosophy of life. 

  October 17, 2015

  Education

  ---

• Challenge the Status Quo: Strengths and Limitations of Academic Freedom

  Undergraduates of America,

  The time to change history is yours. 

  It’s likely that you’ve spent most of your life growing up in a bubble. It might be true that, in your hometown, you never knew much about the world around you. You may have wondered about things and desired to learn more, but it might have been difficult for you. You might have felt powerless, oppressed, or weak in any way at some points throughout your life. Now that you’re at the university, But the world is exciting, terrifying, and absurd. And that’s what makes you human. Take it in stride. 

  “Elsipogtog” by Fanny Aaisha

  Now, more than ever, you have the freedom of thought to question anything you want. As an undergraduate, you might be idealistic, valiant, noble vision about the future that is not burdened by the past. Regardless of how true your dreams will be, you should keep this ambition cultivated throughout your life.

  “Freedom is acquired by conquest, not by gift. It must be pursued constantly and responsibly. Freedom is not an ideal located outside of man; nor is it an idea which becomes myth. It is rather the indispensable condition for the quest for human completion.” -Pablo Freire (“Pedagogy of the Oppressed”) 

  In Freire’s 20th century Marxist analysis, the student-teacher relationship is similar to an oppressed-oppressor relationship in which the students are given the freedom and power to understand the human condition. This fights dehumanizing issues like violence, prejudice, and exploitation. The learners and the learned create knowledge hand-in-hand. 

  Regardless of whether or not you agree with Freire’s conclusions (one might argue that his work is outdated), an exploration of the status quo will tell you that the message is clear: challenge authority. No more dogmatic listening to what you should make of your college career. Listen with an active mind. The way you change the world is not through what the academic advisors will tell you. And it’s not through what your professors did when they were your age. It’s through something developed by 

  you for the ever-changing 21st century.

  There is a common theme that the education is meant to provide a utilitarian value to prepare us for our future. We value ourselves as students only insofar as we can make money and produce a benefit to society. But, as many scholars have argued over the centuries, the value of an education isn’t something with a price tag. You’re at the university to become a better person, cultivate a love of learning, and understand the true gifts of a liberal arts education. 

  Stepping back in time further, late-19th century German Philosophy Friedrich Nietzsche would lament that utility-based approach to education, as well. He would write:

  as much knowledge and education as possible—leading to the greatest possible production and demand—leading to the greatest happiness: that’s the formula. Here we have Utility as the goal and purpose of education, or more precisely Gain: the highest possible income … Culture is tolerated only insofar as it serves the cause of earning money. (“On The Future Of Our Educational Institutions”)

  It’s easy to see why education needs something more than just preparing us for future careers or for allowing us to make the most money in the future. Unfortunately, while this argument sounds beautiful in theory, it’s far too romantic and idealistic to practically implement. At the end of the day, you need a roof over your head before having the luxury of studying Shakespeare. And the reality of the role that technology is increasingly playing in our society means that it would be ridiculous if undergraduates switched to Philosophy majors in order to truly appreciate Descartes during their four years at the university. 

  And, in spite of the individual freedom of an ideal democracy, there’s something that worries you: Is all of this individual freedom truly good for us?

  Nietzsche wrote that pursuing complete freedom for the student would lead to chaos, and, instead, called for discipline and order among students. He criticized the schools that would “succeed in implanting independence in the place of the dependence, discipline, subordination, and obedience implanted by former generations that thought it their duty to drive away all the bumptiousness of independence!” (“On The Future Of Our Educational Institutions”) We should realize that becoming completely free in the value we get from our education would cause us to have entirely subjective, vague concepts of education. From these limitations, it’s clear we have both practical and pragmatic reasons to question even freedom itself. 

  Mid-October 1871. From left: Erwin Rohde, Karl von Gersdorff, Nietzsche. With his friends, Nietzsche was able to freely express the isolation he experienced in Academia. Only through such unhindered expression can we explore such topics.

  With great power comes great responsibility. I’m not going to tell you what your priorities are nor am I going to try to persuade you to adopt a certain philosophy of education. You should do that yourself. You have the right to choose what you want to get from your education. Maybe it is the process in which we examine our concept of freedom in the context of education that truly gives us answers. If your classes don’t encourage enough skepticism and inquiry, then you’re missing out on those things. 

  Now who’s stopping you?

  September 18, 2015

  Education

  ---

• The Eclectic Lunatic: At The Crossroads of Knowledge

  The other day I had the wonderful opportunity to meet up with a high school friend. Through our conversation, we serendipitously wandered through topics of Nietzsche, statistical inaccuracies in peer-reviewed literature, ethnography, and much more that we had both studied. It was only speculation of both of our limited backgrounds, though. Neither of us intended to claim expertise on any of the subjects nor could reliably do justice to all of the topics we mentioned, but would enjoyed to muse about little things we had read here and there. Particularly, she was very interested in my academic background of physics and philosophy.

  On a purely anecdotal level, I’ve already met plenty of students with studying disparate fields. Combinations like biology and art history, mathematics and philosophy, theatre and literature, and neuroscience and gender studies are just a few examples of degree programs of students only satisfied in intellectual diversity. These paths of disparate majors might have unexplored value, as well. We are already seeing more humanities majors entering medical school, and a students have perceived greater gains when studying seemingly unrelated fields.

  “A man cannot serve two masters.”

  Here at IU, many of my friends enter college with a lot of AP credits or exemption from certain classes. Some of us take advantage of this space to broaden our horizons or explore completely new fields of study. It’s also easy to find several course offerings that do not lie in a strict single “field,” and, instead, may invite knowledge from various areas (for example, the History and Philosophy of Science, Bioethics, Medieval Philosophy, etc). While I highly recommend pursuing academic excellence in disparate fields, I’m a bit more skeptical of the value of these interdisciplinary courses. They may compromise value from multiple fields for the sake of explaining a one-size-fits-all course that fails to do justice to any single field. It is better to understand how to approach problems from different points-of-view through specialized training of those different fields. Since we are at a university campus with monumental levels of diversity of course offerings, it makes sense that many of us choose to study subjects that may seem unrelated. But is our love of disparate disciplines only caused by having the luxury of being able to explore them? Or is it the result of something else?

  Getting the best of both worlds meant everyday was something different for me. Sometimes I would be enamored by phase-space diagrams and other days it would be a classical dialogue. As the nights would linger on, I would spend each moment poring through the infinite of my laptop in a constant cycle between physics, philosophy, and probably something important. Sometimes my attention would become so I can hardly keep focus on a single thought for more than a few minutes at a time. I can’t help but wonder if our obsession with disparate fields is at least partly caused by an inundation of new, varied information everyday. But even before the advent of smartphones and personal computers, the unpredictable yet exciting problems of the 20th and 21st century have called for a certain intellectual flexibility that cannot be approached through simple, straightforward training programs anymore. The way we explore multiple fields might have value in the way we create a liberal arts education.

  The type of undying curiosity and ambition hearkens back to the days of da Vinci and Michelangelo. Back to the days when engineers crafted sculptures, musicians wrote books, and philosophers had jobs. The University of Southern California created the program, “Renaissance Scholars” specifically for students who have studied disparate fields. One of my previous philosophy professors wasn’t too fond of the title “Renaissance Scholars.” “The Renaissance is over,” he declared. The Renaissance may be over, but let’s hope our re-birth of disparate knowledge never ends.

  August 25, 2015

  Education, Medicine, Science

  ---