Liberal Arts Then:
>The seven liberal arts were taught in two groups: the trivium and the quadrivium :
> Trivium
> Grammar
> Dialectic (logic)
> Rhetoric
> Quadrivium
> Arithmetic
> Geometry
> Astronomy
> Music Theory
The "Liberal" "Arts" now:
>"some people just don't have the head for math and science, so it isn't required as part of our curriculuum"
What happened? How can anyone look at this and not come away thinking that the bar has been lowered? Back in the day if you were an intellectual, you studied math and science in addition to philosophy, and even if it wasn't your main passion you were at least good at it. Now, for whatever reason, we as a society have decided that these things aren't that important for everyone, and that we can transfer it to a special class of intellectuals while the rest don't even give it an honest try. Why? Is it because higher education has become a commodity to be traded on the market, meaning it had to be re-worked to appeal to more people? They say undergrad is the new high school, so why don't we follow high school's example by requiring a more rounded curriculum for the humanities?
>>891180
>Back in the day if you were an intellectual, you studied math and science in addition to philosophy,
Hardly. Trivium-Quadrivium is more of a medieval meme so talking about degeneration from Medieval era is a bit absurd. One should start from modern era. Most of the Modern University education was just
-Latin
-Greek
-Ancient History
If you don't believe me you can easily find Course Catalogues of Upenn, Harvard etc from 19th century. Those were the basis of education. Math-Medicine etc came later on after you finished your latin and greek. Though later on Mathematics, Geometry was added to the curriculum and more it was added, less emphasis was being made on latin-greek and it just dissolved completely post WWII.
Regardless, Higher education back then was designed for the elite by the elite. Fucking Roosevelt and his fucking G.I. bill gave middle class an entitlement that they also should get a university education.
Nowadays higher education is / or should be a place for job training. Unless you are filthy rich you shouldn't study humanities in the fist place. The only thing one should study is to how to get a job i.e. how to make my employer richer.
Law is literally the first and most important university discipline
>>891212
>Hardly. Trivium-Quadrivium is more of a medieval meme so talking about degeneration from Medieval era is a bit absurd. One should start from modern era.
How Whiggish. I don't think you can say that a curriculum devoted to Greek, Latin, and history is superior to a curriculum that includes Latin and various other disciplines just because one came after the other.
>non-STEM degrees
>>891212
19th century manuscripts from Oxford hardly tell us anything about the nature of medieval education in Europe or the use of quadrivium-driven information and cultural norms, though.
>>891236
stem degrees are modern day peasant education for guild membership
>>891230
I'm not saying it was superior or inferior. But take a look into early 19th century curriculum of Harvard, Upenn, Oxford etc. You can found many of them online in the university archives. Its %90 Latin/Greek/History, %10 Mathematics/Agriculture/Geometry etc. I'm not saying this is good or bad but it is what it is (or was). More emphasis on mathematics and vocational courses were added later on. Greek became very unpopular at first and then Latin vanished.
Its not the classical education that is the problem. Those who wanted to became doctors-lawyers etc did so after they received their classical education. Problem is the G.I. Bill etc. Middle class should have never entered the higher education in the first place.
University should be limited to 1% to 5% of the population regardless of the curriculum.
>>891247
Not manuscripts, literally course catalogues. I believe it is absurd to make compassion with that. If one must talk about the bastardization of modern education we should go back to modern era and do not travel beyond.
>>891251
And humanities degrees are modern day peasant education WITHOUT guild membership.
>>891387
>mfw the humanities are so piss-easy that humanities majors think we should impose quotas so they don't have to compete for part-time non-tenure track associate positions.
Pfftchahaha I'm Lmaoing at your life right now.
>>891387
>More like academic membership for humanities, m8.
So basically, another guild. Except one that gets less funding and can't even find jobs for all its members.
A failed guild.
>>891423
Right, my mistake. I forgot that to be a guild you have to actually create something someone (outside of your guild) would pay for.
I guess the academic situation in the humanities is closer to that of a cult or other religious organization, or a pyramid scheme.
