What do you think?
Rate this book
Education's End: Why Our Colleges and Universities Have Given Up on the Meaning of Life
A passionate call for our colleges and universities to prepare young people for lives of fulfillment not just successful careers
The question of what living is for—of what one should care about and why—is the most important question a person can ask. Yet under the influence of the modern research ideal, our colleges and universities have expelled this question from their classrooms, judging it unfit for organized study. In this eloquent and carefully considered book, Tony Kronman explores why this has happened and calls for the restoration of life’s most important question to an honored place in higher education.The author contrasts an earlier era in American education, when the question of the meaning of life was at the center of instruction, with our own times, when this question has been largely abandoned by college and university teachers. In particular, teachers of the humanities, who once felt a special responsibility to guide their students in exploring the question of what living is for, have lost confidence in their authority to do so. And they have lost sight of the question itself in the blinding fog of political correctness that has dominated their disciplines for the past forty years. Yet Kronman sees a readiness for change—a longing among teachers as well as students to engage questions of ultimate meaning. He urges a revival of the humanities’ lost tradition of studying the meaning of life through the careful but critical reading of great works of literary and philosophical imagination. And he offers here the charter document of that revival.
The question of what living is for—of what one should care about and why—is the most important question a person can ask. Yet under the influence of the modern research ideal, our colleges and universities have expelled this question from their classrooms, judging it unfit for organized study. In this eloquent and carefully considered book, Tony Kronman explores why this has happened and calls for the restoration of life’s most important question to an honored place in higher education.The author contrasts an earlier era in American education, when the question of the meaning of life was at the center of instruction, with our own times, when this question has been largely abandoned by college and university teachers. In particular, teachers of the humanities, who once felt a special responsibility to guide their students in exploring the question of what living is for, have lost confidence in their authority to do so. And they have lost sight of the question itself in the blinding fog of political correctness that has dominated their disciplines for the past forty years. Yet Kronman sees a readiness for change—a longing among teachers as well as students to engage questions of ultimate meaning. He urges a revival of the humanities’ lost tradition of studying the meaning of life through the careful but critical reading of great works of literary and philosophical imagination. And he offers here the charter document of that revival.
320 pages, Paperback
First published September 1, 2007
29 people are currently reading
663 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 36 reviews
November 21, 2013
Anthony Kronman had me by the time I got to the subtitle. I wanted to know, "why, indeed, have our colleges and universities given up on the meaning of life?" It brought to mind a conversation with a religious studies faculty about the evidence from studies of spirituality in higher education of the longing of students to talk openly about these questions in their classes. The faculty person said something to this effect, "I could never do that. What we are about is the academic study of religion and not the personal beliefs of students."
Kronman begins the book describing a philosophy seminar on Existentialism taught by his undergraduate college department chair. The seminar met in the chair's home. The readings were demanding, the discussions about a life well lived were passionate. Birthed in those discussions was the conviction that higher education was a place "where the question of what living is for can be pursued in an organized way" (p. 6). His book is an impassioned argument for both why higher education has largely abandoned such discussions (except in late night bull sessions!) and what is to be done.
He, like others writers about the current state of the university, traces the history of colleges and universities in our country from their beginnings as church supported institutions designed to impart classical education informed by a Christian theological perspective. He sees this being supplanted in the era after the Civil War with the rise of what he calls "secular humanism". By this he means that with the rise of Darwinism and higher critical skepticism in theological circles, the old "dogmatic" (his language) consensus was eclipsed by a pluralistic chorus of voices beginning with the Transcendentalists in this country and the Kantians and others in Europe. In place of the fixed set of courses of classical and Christian teaching came a much larger and growingly flexible core of courses introducing students to the "Great Conversation" about life's big questions. No longer was the idea to faithfully transmit traditional belief, but rather to expose student to the multitude of voices that would allow the student to crystallize his/her beliefs. In one form or another, this secular humanism reigned in the humanities until the late 1960s. It was this Kronman experienced and this he would argue the university needs to recover today.
Two developments in the university account for the eclipse of the secular humanistic ideal of education. The first was the rise of the research ideal, first in the physical and then the social sciences. The discovery of new knowledge rigorously elaborated through experiment and publication that resulted in economically and socially useful knowledge challenged the secular humanist ideal. The second was the rise of various critical studies that might be lumped under "post-modernism" that analyzed any discourses on meaning and truth as simply exercises in power and affirmed politically correct forms of multi-culturalism. Perhaps one of the most telling critiques in this book is his exposition of how these approaches constrain honest, passionate discourse because of the fears of falling afoul by clothing a "power agenda" in the language of truth or meaning, and fears of offending some statute of political correctness. Both the research ideal and the political correctness of the classroom ruled out honest, rigorous, passionate discussions of meaning and life well lived.
The final part of the book in many ways are the most personal as Kronman honestly faces the question most of us like to deny--the fact that we will all die and that all of us need some compelling answer to what we will live for in the face of our death and even be willing to die for. He concedes, somewhat pejoratively in my view, that religious institutions, particularly "fundamentalists" are the main ones talking about these questions. He rejects these as giving up intellectual and personal freedom and calls for the world of higher education to once again take up these perennially important matters.
This is where I find myself saying "yes, but" to Kronman. In my recent blog post "Whither, or wither, the liberal arts" I related the lifelong impact of similar courses in my own life at an urban commuter university serving working class students like myself. One way or another, young adults at this stage are exploring these questions. The disciplined, intellectually rigorous exploration of these matters to clarify one's own deepest commitments seems far more important than simply acquiring the credentials for a job that may or may not exist in ten years.
Where I dissent from Kronman is in his dismissiveness toward religious answers as an important part of this discussion. It seems he assumes that the only two choices are mindless dogmatism or intellectually rigorous secular humanism. He fails to acknowledge the tradition of religious humanism that united serious inquiry with reasonable belief. Nor does he acknowledge the long tradition of thoughtful Catholic scholarship continuing to the present day that carries on this tradition nor the resurgence of thoughtful scholarship in fields like history and philosophy that link belief in a transcendent God and rigorous and intellectually credible scholarship. The great loss here is that Kronman tars religious sources with a broad brush that makes them adversaries to the kind of enterprise he proposes, when in fact at least some of these might be allies in the recovery of "education's end."
Kronman begins the book describing a philosophy seminar on Existentialism taught by his undergraduate college department chair. The seminar met in the chair's home. The readings were demanding, the discussions about a life well lived were passionate. Birthed in those discussions was the conviction that higher education was a place "where the question of what living is for can be pursued in an organized way" (p. 6). His book is an impassioned argument for both why higher education has largely abandoned such discussions (except in late night bull sessions!) and what is to be done.
He, like others writers about the current state of the university, traces the history of colleges and universities in our country from their beginnings as church supported institutions designed to impart classical education informed by a Christian theological perspective. He sees this being supplanted in the era after the Civil War with the rise of what he calls "secular humanism". By this he means that with the rise of Darwinism and higher critical skepticism in theological circles, the old "dogmatic" (his language) consensus was eclipsed by a pluralistic chorus of voices beginning with the Transcendentalists in this country and the Kantians and others in Europe. In place of the fixed set of courses of classical and Christian teaching came a much larger and growingly flexible core of courses introducing students to the "Great Conversation" about life's big questions. No longer was the idea to faithfully transmit traditional belief, but rather to expose student to the multitude of voices that would allow the student to crystallize his/her beliefs. In one form or another, this secular humanism reigned in the humanities until the late 1960s. It was this Kronman experienced and this he would argue the university needs to recover today.
Two developments in the university account for the eclipse of the secular humanistic ideal of education. The first was the rise of the research ideal, first in the physical and then the social sciences. The discovery of new knowledge rigorously elaborated through experiment and publication that resulted in economically and socially useful knowledge challenged the secular humanist ideal. The second was the rise of various critical studies that might be lumped under "post-modernism" that analyzed any discourses on meaning and truth as simply exercises in power and affirmed politically correct forms of multi-culturalism. Perhaps one of the most telling critiques in this book is his exposition of how these approaches constrain honest, passionate discourse because of the fears of falling afoul by clothing a "power agenda" in the language of truth or meaning, and fears of offending some statute of political correctness. Both the research ideal and the political correctness of the classroom ruled out honest, rigorous, passionate discussions of meaning and life well lived.
The final part of the book in many ways are the most personal as Kronman honestly faces the question most of us like to deny--the fact that we will all die and that all of us need some compelling answer to what we will live for in the face of our death and even be willing to die for. He concedes, somewhat pejoratively in my view, that religious institutions, particularly "fundamentalists" are the main ones talking about these questions. He rejects these as giving up intellectual and personal freedom and calls for the world of higher education to once again take up these perennially important matters.
This is where I find myself saying "yes, but" to Kronman. In my recent blog post "Whither, or wither, the liberal arts" I related the lifelong impact of similar courses in my own life at an urban commuter university serving working class students like myself. One way or another, young adults at this stage are exploring these questions. The disciplined, intellectually rigorous exploration of these matters to clarify one's own deepest commitments seems far more important than simply acquiring the credentials for a job that may or may not exist in ten years.
Where I dissent from Kronman is in his dismissiveness toward religious answers as an important part of this discussion. It seems he assumes that the only two choices are mindless dogmatism or intellectually rigorous secular humanism. He fails to acknowledge the tradition of religious humanism that united serious inquiry with reasonable belief. Nor does he acknowledge the long tradition of thoughtful Catholic scholarship continuing to the present day that carries on this tradition nor the resurgence of thoughtful scholarship in fields like history and philosophy that link belief in a transcendent God and rigorous and intellectually credible scholarship. The great loss here is that Kronman tars religious sources with a broad brush that makes them adversaries to the kind of enterprise he proposes, when in fact at least some of these might be allies in the recovery of "education's end."
October 6, 2022
I have always been deeply suspicious of the “career pathway” dogma public ed pushes. The consequence has been a devaluing of the humanities because they can not easily be placed into a career pathways, at least by those with failing imaginations. Which of course is the problem. These are the very people pulling the strings and designing the pathways. This also means that huge swaths of young adults who could be pursuing questions of meaning and what’s worth caring about in life through the study of works of literature in a humanities classroom are left alone and fall prey to religious fundamentalism and conspiratorial thinking which provides answers that appeal to the worst of human impulses. The reestablishment of the primacy of the humanities is essential.
I disagreed with one his three major arguments in this book, but I appreciated the challenge. He wasn’t reckless with his positions. He was methodical, and wrote in complex logical movements. I still disagreed. But that did not, thankfully, make his other points less salient.
I disagreed with one his three major arguments in this book, but I appreciated the challenge. He wasn’t reckless with his positions. He was methodical, and wrote in complex logical movements. I still disagreed. But that did not, thankfully, make his other points less salient.
December 10, 2008
A persuasive argument for the importance of a secular humanist education to higher-education. Prior to mid 19th C. our colleges' curriculum were focused on the question of "What living is for?" It was deemed to be the most crucial question for living. It valued recurrence, connection and closure -- ties to Western civilization and thought.
With the rise of the research ideal in German "universities" in mid-19th C. the disciplines of humanities, social sciences and natural sciences were never the same. There was an increasing silo-ization of the disciplines. Specialization and original research became the mantra of academia.
Kronman doesn't argue that the research ideal hasn't generated great research and ideas. Just that there should be more balance in education and in higher education curriculum for college students.
After he delves into the problems with the research ideal in humanities he looks at how the weakened field of humanities in the 1960s fell easily to political correctness. Political correctness ended up hurting the one bastion left for learning the art of living. Political orthodoxy through political correctness strangled discourse and debate at the harm to students and our culture.
Kronman successful argues for the need to restore the place of humanities in our universities in colleges so that they can once again be the spiritual leaders for our society -- providing an alternative to churches and other fundamental orthodoxies.
With the rise of the research ideal in German "universities" in mid-19th C. the disciplines of humanities, social sciences and natural sciences were never the same. There was an increasing silo-ization of the disciplines. Specialization and original research became the mantra of academia.
Kronman doesn't argue that the research ideal hasn't generated great research and ideas. Just that there should be more balance in education and in higher education curriculum for college students.
After he delves into the problems with the research ideal in humanities he looks at how the weakened field of humanities in the 1960s fell easily to political correctness. Political correctness ended up hurting the one bastion left for learning the art of living. Political orthodoxy through political correctness strangled discourse and debate at the harm to students and our culture.
Kronman successful argues for the need to restore the place of humanities in our universities in colleges so that they can once again be the spiritual leaders for our society -- providing an alternative to churches and other fundamental orthodoxies.
October 11, 2009
I give this book 4 stars despite how much I disagree with so many of his assumptions and conclusions. I try not to read only what I already agree with. He makes some very interesting points and is both eloquent and passionate in his opinions. The problem of the humanities in the universities losing their sense of purpose is a real one even if I disagree sometimes with his explanation of its causes and solutions. Whether you agree or disagree with him, the book will make you think deeply about the role of the humanities in education. For that alone, it deserves 4 stars.
February 8, 2009
Kronman offers at times an exhaustive yet impassioned defense of keeping the humanities strong in colleges and universities. As higher education has evolved into what Kronman refers to as the Research Ideal, secular humanism as a way to understand the meaning of life has been reduced to a shallow political correctness that leaves our lives and the lives of those who graduated from college over the last generation empty.
Although Kronman's repetitiousness through the first four chapters had my eyes glazing over, he redemmed himself with an impassioned plea in the final chapter to bring a spirit back to the age of science. As a high school teacher who sees his students' eyes mezmerized by a 2-inch cell phone screen, I could not have agreed more with Kronman's very eloquent assessment of our state of affairs: "We live today in a narcotized stupor, blind to the ways in which our own immense powers and the knowledge that has produced them cuts us off from the knowledge of who we are."
I, for one, will heed Kronman's call to understand better the converstations over the millenia that have defined Western civilization and made us come to grips with our own mortality. Could someone please pass the Plato?
Although Kronman's repetitiousness through the first four chapters had my eyes glazing over, he redemmed himself with an impassioned plea in the final chapter to bring a spirit back to the age of science. As a high school teacher who sees his students' eyes mezmerized by a 2-inch cell phone screen, I could not have agreed more with Kronman's very eloquent assessment of our state of affairs: "We live today in a narcotized stupor, blind to the ways in which our own immense powers and the knowledge that has produced them cuts us off from the knowledge of who we are."
I, for one, will heed Kronman's call to understand better the converstations over the millenia that have defined Western civilization and made us come to grips with our own mortality. Could someone please pass the Plato?
May 13, 2015
I read this book for work. It is about a lot of the usual things - political correctness, etc - but Kronman discusses them in an original way. The weakest part of the book is his tripartite scheme for the history of humanities education in America - it's too general, and I just don't buy it - but the stuff about German romantic ideas about the individual + connection between humanities and the diversity legal regime make up for it.
I doubt this book will convince anyone, but as a fan of the 'liberal arts are dying / save the humanities!' genre, I enjoyed it.
I doubt this book will convince anyone, but as a fan of the 'liberal arts are dying / save the humanities!' genre, I enjoyed it.
August 24, 2025
An interesting read about how the humanities have lost their direction though I didn’t really agree with some of the points in the book.
November 5, 2022
Took a weirdly racist turn in Chapter 4 with a hard right into Eurocentrism and Western exceptionalism.
September 17, 2021
This book sounds dry but the author, besides repeating his point, makes it quite interesting. The author proposes that the best way to examine the meaning of life is through the study of the humanities. He says that as humans we need to wonder about the meaning of life for each of us individually through reading other points of view on the meaning of life. He then gives a history of college education. It started, in the US, as one set of knowledge that all students had to learn, including theology. Eventually, theology was taken out of a college education and secular humanism replaced it. Secular humanism is the study of reason, ethics, and naturalism minus religious studies. Then, in Germany, people began to research specific topics and a more modern study of topics spread to the US. There was no longer one body of information to learn in college but many. In the 1960s, constructionism and political correctness took over secular humanism and the study of the humanities contracted. People stopped looking at the meaning of life from an individual standpoint and instead began examining life from the standpoint of a specific group (gender, race, religious affiliation, etc). Eventually, people have stopped examining the meaning of life. This has caused us to reflect and understand ourselves less. The sciences and social sciences, in the meantime, have become more exact and measured as well as studied in depth. Kronman says we need to examine the meaning of life again. And some universities are doing this. He says it is imperative that we more deeply reflect on this question.
March 25, 2018
Points were fairly straightforward and relatively well-supported (at least with arguments, some I think could have been supported more by studies, trends, or direct observations of some kind - although perhaps that is the exact research-based bias Kronman spends some time talking about).
Personally found Kronman's writing to be a bit repetitive; at times there seemed to be long sentences or whole paragraphs that were almost exact repeats of the previous one save for one small addition or emphasis... it was enough to grate some but not distract too much.
Overall in terms of the ideas of the book I found myself persuaded by or agreeing with most of them, especially the problems which the humanities in particular face in modern education (at one point he says at least they are not in danger of being cut, but in the news last week was UW-Stevens Point's plan to do away with most of their humanities programs...). While I think that freedom to teach to 'the meaning of life' is important and that great books courses or western history/philosophy etc. can be of great help, I personally don't find secular humanism to be THE one great answer to the question of our life's purpose, but I didn't have to agree with that hypothesis to benefit greatly from Kronman's analysis of today's universities.
Personally found Kronman's writing to be a bit repetitive; at times there seemed to be long sentences or whole paragraphs that were almost exact repeats of the previous one save for one small addition or emphasis... it was enough to grate some but not distract too much.
Overall in terms of the ideas of the book I found myself persuaded by or agreeing with most of them, especially the problems which the humanities in particular face in modern education (at one point he says at least they are not in danger of being cut, but in the news last week was UW-Stevens Point's plan to do away with most of their humanities programs...). While I think that freedom to teach to 'the meaning of life' is important and that great books courses or western history/philosophy etc. can be of great help, I personally don't find secular humanism to be THE one great answer to the question of our life's purpose, but I didn't have to agree with that hypothesis to benefit greatly from Kronman's analysis of today's universities.
October 2, 2025
I got catfishes into reading a pseudo intellectual racist book!
This book quickly turns into a rant about affirmative action, basically it’s the author saying “I cannot believe we let them into our university and are reading their books too instead of just white western philosophers! No one talks about the meaning of life anymore, they just want to discuss politics and identity and defend their position” ummmm I’m sorry but you’re the one making this political. I don’t think there is any evidence that affirmative action or diversifying the courses and available topics displaced courses or people! He’s the one making a topic political when he doesn’t need to be.
As an aside I do genuinely think it is an interesting question to ask what the purpose of college is beyond getting the skills for a J.O.B. which it’s largely not very useful for (most jobs require job / company specific skills) and I’m not sure we need 4 years and a 1/4-1/2 a million dollars of debt for that.
I also found it very disturbing that while he is lamenting that there are now some people who are not white and some books not written by white people in the humanities he goes on to say essentially that thank goodness the sciences haven’t been affected by “pc culture”.
I wish Goodreads would allow negative star reviews.
This book quickly turns into a rant about affirmative action, basically it’s the author saying “I cannot believe we let them into our university and are reading their books too instead of just white western philosophers! No one talks about the meaning of life anymore, they just want to discuss politics and identity and defend their position” ummmm I’m sorry but you’re the one making this political. I don’t think there is any evidence that affirmative action or diversifying the courses and available topics displaced courses or people! He’s the one making a topic political when he doesn’t need to be.
As an aside I do genuinely think it is an interesting question to ask what the purpose of college is beyond getting the skills for a J.O.B. which it’s largely not very useful for (most jobs require job / company specific skills) and I’m not sure we need 4 years and a 1/4-1/2 a million dollars of debt for that.
I also found it very disturbing that while he is lamenting that there are now some people who are not white and some books not written by white people in the humanities he goes on to say essentially that thank goodness the sciences haven’t been affected by “pc culture”.
I wish Goodreads would allow negative star reviews.
July 31, 2023
Not very interesting or engaging. It was just a long philosophy book. What it felt more like was a history book on philosophy and the humanities programs within universities. There were some key parts, but I found it a chore to get through. I was expecting the book to attack the education system but it was none of that.
Important Quote:
“Colleges, it was said ‘break up and diffuse among the people that monopoly and mental power which despotic governments accumulate for purposes of arbitrary rule, and bring to the children of the humblest families of the nation a full and fair opportunity’ for higher learning - a conviction that combined democratic and aristocratic ideas in a distinctly American way” (52)
Surprising Fact:
Colleges went through a period focusing on the German universities where they became more research and science based rather than previous emphasis on the classic humanities.
Key Takeaway:
Higher education has less emphasis on the meaning of life and teaching one how to find said meaning, and a greater focus on specific concentrations and areas of study.
Important Quote:
“Colleges, it was said ‘break up and diffuse among the people that monopoly and mental power which despotic governments accumulate for purposes of arbitrary rule, and bring to the children of the humblest families of the nation a full and fair opportunity’ for higher learning - a conviction that combined democratic and aristocratic ideas in a distinctly American way” (52)
Surprising Fact:
Colleges went through a period focusing on the German universities where they became more research and science based rather than previous emphasis on the classic humanities.
Key Takeaway:
Higher education has less emphasis on the meaning of life and teaching one how to find said meaning, and a greater focus on specific concentrations and areas of study.
March 17, 2017
Meaning. Authenticity. Mission. Purpose. Values. What is the meaning of life? This is a huge question. It is a question we all need to ask and answer. College students struggle with this question on an entirely different level as they transition from childhood to adulthood.
When I picked up this book I was looking for a good argument to bring back the debate of the meaning of life to the college campus. Unfortunately, I did not find what I was looking for here.
Now being a Christian, I understand that my critique is clouded. I have a certain view of the meaning of life and my view is relatively exclusive but that does not mean I excuse myself from exploring the issue. As Kronman states, secular humanism rejects the assumption that there is a single right answer. Kronman backs up this statement very well by showing how in every field there are a wide range of opinions and thinking. And though I agree that there will always be disagreement, we are all no matter the question looking for the correct answer. Let us look at the answer for the meaning of life from all avenues including atheism, spiritualists, devout religious, and everything in between.
Additionally, I didn’t find the book to be an adequate overview of how colleges and universities operate. The book felt more like a harsh critique of humanities professor, reviewing how the failed to advance the field.
This just was not the book I was looking for so I cannot recommend it, but the arguments listed are still well written.
When I picked up this book I was looking for a good argument to bring back the debate of the meaning of life to the college campus. Unfortunately, I did not find what I was looking for here.
Now being a Christian, I understand that my critique is clouded. I have a certain view of the meaning of life and my view is relatively exclusive but that does not mean I excuse myself from exploring the issue. As Kronman states, secular humanism rejects the assumption that there is a single right answer. Kronman backs up this statement very well by showing how in every field there are a wide range of opinions and thinking. And though I agree that there will always be disagreement, we are all no matter the question looking for the correct answer. Let us look at the answer for the meaning of life from all avenues including atheism, spiritualists, devout religious, and everything in between.
Additionally, I didn’t find the book to be an adequate overview of how colleges and universities operate. The book felt more like a harsh critique of humanities professor, reviewing how the failed to advance the field.
This just was not the book I was looking for so I cannot recommend it, but the arguments listed are still well written.
January 26, 2020
Kronman provides a brief history of higher education throughout the last several centuries. He argues that the humanities now occupy the lowest rung on the academic hierarchy at universities, below the natural and social sciences, because of what he calls “the research ideal” and political correctness. As a graduate of two large research universities, the research ideal was ingrained in me in ways I didn’t even realize until I read this book. I don’t buy every argument Kronman makes about political correctness, and some of his reasoning went over my head in that chapter, but you should read it for yourself. This book made me want to read more classic literature and philosophy and experience more theatre -- to revisit the humanities in order to get in touch with my own humanity.
August 18, 2021
bok jag läste med jobbet :( lite intressant med universitetshistoria men också ur ett SÅ amerikanskt perspektiv, mkt upprepningar och flaky författare?? vet inte var man har honom
Read
November 16, 2022interesting theories.
January 7, 2026
well that got racist pretty quick
May 31, 2022
The information is good but I found this book confusing. The author wanders a lot in trying to make his point. It could use a review with Strunk & White.
October 19, 2010
I don't think I can do justice to this book in a review, as I am too unfamiliar with the history, the ideas presented, and the cast of characters discussed. I found it very technical and darn near incomprehensible in spots. So let's just do a rough outline should I ever be quizzed on its contents:
American and European universities have gone through three phases since about the mid-18th century:
(1) As training grounds for ministers, for making gentlemen, and with no thought at all given to the practicality of the cirriculum. This lasted until approximately the end of the American Civil War.
(2) After that time colleges and universities became increasingly secular, and at some point or other began espousing "secular humanism" (in the humanities) and the "research ideal" in the natural and "hard" social sciences.
(3) Somewhere around the end of World War I "secular humanism" was gradually replaced with "constructivism" and that is the situation of the humanities today.
The research ideal ignores "purpose of life" type discussion in favor of increasingly narrow specialization, constructivism defines just about everything in terms of power relationships and/or racial, gender, ethnic blocs, also hardly conducive to thinking about the meaning of life.
Kronman bemoans this present state of things, and hopes something close to secular humanism is allowed someday back into the Humanities departments. Though he is able to offer only the slenderest of reeds that this might happen, he thinks it will because constructivism is "bankrupt," in his term.
Dunno about that, but he certainly impressed upon me that the current state of the Humanities is (a) a loony bin, (b) Stalinist in what is acceptable and unacceptable discourse, and (c) split into packs of wolves fighting over the same territory. And pack disloyality is the greatest of all crimes, certainly far ahead of silly things like telling the truth, should it conflict with one's group.
Maybe that last bit is wrong, but that's what I took away. Depressing listening. Also: the narrator was about as annoying as it is possible to be. Monotone, breathy, etc. Didn't help matters in terms of keeping my interest.
a
American and European universities have gone through three phases since about the mid-18th century:
(1) As training grounds for ministers, for making gentlemen, and with no thought at all given to the practicality of the cirriculum. This lasted until approximately the end of the American Civil War.
(2) After that time colleges and universities became increasingly secular, and at some point or other began espousing "secular humanism" (in the humanities) and the "research ideal" in the natural and "hard" social sciences.
(3) Somewhere around the end of World War I "secular humanism" was gradually replaced with "constructivism" and that is the situation of the humanities today.
The research ideal ignores "purpose of life" type discussion in favor of increasingly narrow specialization, constructivism defines just about everything in terms of power relationships and/or racial, gender, ethnic blocs, also hardly conducive to thinking about the meaning of life.
Kronman bemoans this present state of things, and hopes something close to secular humanism is allowed someday back into the Humanities departments. Though he is able to offer only the slenderest of reeds that this might happen, he thinks it will because constructivism is "bankrupt," in his term.
Dunno about that, but he certainly impressed upon me that the current state of the Humanities is (a) a loony bin, (b) Stalinist in what is acceptable and unacceptable discourse, and (c) split into packs of wolves fighting over the same territory. And pack disloyality is the greatest of all crimes, certainly far ahead of silly things like telling the truth, should it conflict with one's group.
Maybe that last bit is wrong, but that's what I took away. Depressing listening. Also: the narrator was about as annoying as it is possible to be. Monotone, breathy, etc. Didn't help matters in terms of keeping my interest.
a
February 25, 2010
On the whole, a thoughtful and well-written book.
The authors raises many important issues and comes to some interesting conclusions. While I do not agree with all of his conclusions (most notably, that God does not exist), most of his arguments are very, in fact, very compelling.
The author provides a good history of the evolution of institution of higher eduction in the United States. He argues that to provide an appropriately broad liberal education our institution of higher education need to return to the teaching of "arts and letters" (consistent with philosophy of "secular humanism"). If his version of secular humanism provided an allowances for the existence of God (and an afterlife), then I agree with almost all of his conclusions.
His argument about the excessively delitorisou influence of the "research ethic" on the humanities is less compelling. While the applied sciences have certainly been the darlings of Higher Education for the past 150 years, the humanities can, nonetheless, return to their rightful place of influence on the lives of undergraduate students.
This will require increased focus and curricular changes at many institutions, but it is not impossible. The AAC&U LEAP initiative offers one strategy that colleges can employ to help students come to grips with "the meaning of life." This strategy is laid out in: College Learning for the New Global Century
Kronman is not a fan of "political correctness" - a view I share. He also decries the negative influence of initiatives that promote diversity and multiculturalism. He makes some good arguments (particularly that student time is a "zero sum" game) but, ultimately, he fails to fully account for the many benefits that come with increased diversity and the great good that comes from learning about others' cultures.
June 16, 2011
"Our lives are the most precious resource we possess, and the question of how to spend them is the most important question we face." (9)
I was fortunate to have been educated by teachers, both in high school and in the university, who believed that education was ultimately about the search for meaning in life. These teachers believed in honoring our curiosity and need to understand who we are and what is our role in the universe. They taught us to explore, ponder, and find purpose in life. Their philosophy brought energy and a sense of urgency to our education.
I taught at the secondary level for thirty years and now teach at the university level. With increasing alarm I have watched our schools cave in to the pressure to become institutions of dogma and training rather than places for exploration, thought, creativity and discovery. I have watched students become increasing able to answer multiple choice answers, but less able to formulate a thought. Worst of all, I have watched our schools create students without depth and care as our schools have fled the "depths" of life.
We live in a time that has given up on the search for meaning. Education is now about test scores, preparation for a money-making career, making politicians look like they are doing something for the country's good, and conformity. Now, the energy on campus is that which comes from the cell phone and talk about the latest sports score or what to do on the weekend.
As our educational institutions have given up the exploration of the purpose of life, we are left with one less avenue to the discovery that our lives can hold meaning and can, therefore be cherished. We are left with one less opportunity to discover what we hold valuable, what we care about, and what we want to make of our lives in our time on earth.
I was fortunate to have been educated by teachers, both in high school and in the university, who believed that education was ultimately about the search for meaning in life. These teachers believed in honoring our curiosity and need to understand who we are and what is our role in the universe. They taught us to explore, ponder, and find purpose in life. Their philosophy brought energy and a sense of urgency to our education.
I taught at the secondary level for thirty years and now teach at the university level. With increasing alarm I have watched our schools cave in to the pressure to become institutions of dogma and training rather than places for exploration, thought, creativity and discovery. I have watched students become increasing able to answer multiple choice answers, but less able to formulate a thought. Worst of all, I have watched our schools create students without depth and care as our schools have fled the "depths" of life.
We live in a time that has given up on the search for meaning. Education is now about test scores, preparation for a money-making career, making politicians look like they are doing something for the country's good, and conformity. Now, the energy on campus is that which comes from the cell phone and talk about the latest sports score or what to do on the weekend.
As our educational institutions have given up the exploration of the purpose of life, we are left with one less avenue to the discovery that our lives can hold meaning and can, therefore be cherished. We are left with one less opportunity to discover what we hold valuable, what we care about, and what we want to make of our lives in our time on earth.
January 9, 2008
IF you are interested in the goals of higher education (and the trickle-down effect to high performing and highly selective high schools), this book brings rewards. Though the reading goes slowly since the author is wordy about his ideas, there are some great points to ponder. The author believes that gone are the days of a "classical college education" with broad-based inquiry, reading classics and considering the "BIG" questions of life. He believes that higher ed is "training" its students well but they (and we all) are suffering as a result of the "research model" of the university where everything becomes highly specialized quickly and the goal is to turn out either pre-professionals or people who will continue to focus and generate authentically new information in one particular area through research. The leap to my neck of the woods is that the independent secondary school might be the default keeper of the study of the classics and the promotion of broad-based thinking. On another note, the history of higher education in this country is fascinating and one of the strong points of this book. Overall, I appreciated the intellectual exercise that this book provided and will remember certain arguments as I go about my work.
July 26, 2009
It's a fascinating account of the demise of the humanities and it offers historical and current background on our university system. Apparently, the current US university structure was modeled after Germany's research institutions. As a result, every subject became a specialty and the humanities succumbed to the pressure to departmentalize. Another pressure was 20th Century church doctrine. Some religious and political pundits think the discussion belongs in church--that the answers are in God's realm. Then humanities professors lost confidence in themselves as they thought they weren't qualified to lead the enquiry.
He goes on to argue that now more than ever the study of What is living for? is essential. Science and its research have become an integral part of our lives--fast internet connections, extending life with medicine, etc. that we need to look at our mortality and ask: technology has provided us with these things, but still what is living for? His version is called secular humanities and he posits that higher education must offer an alternative study from the religious study of the meaning of life because, according to Kronman, there is only one answer in the theological realm, yet many, individual answers, in the secular realm.
He goes on to argue that now more than ever the study of What is living for? is essential. Science and its research have become an integral part of our lives--fast internet connections, extending life with medicine, etc. that we need to look at our mortality and ask: technology has provided us with these things, but still what is living for? His version is called secular humanities and he posits that higher education must offer an alternative study from the religious study of the meaning of life because, according to Kronman, there is only one answer in the theological realm, yet many, individual answers, in the secular realm.
January 20, 2013
I read this a while ago and liked it in general. If I disagree with the author on anything it is mostly on the high place he gives secular humanism. However as a critique of what is wrong in the modern world I can hardly disagree with him nor is his emphasis on the humanities misplaced although I think it fails to fully confront the problem which he does identify largely in terms similar to C.P. Snow's "Two Cultures"
The problem is that we have divided up the world into little insulated boxes with labels on them like chemistry, physics, literature, philosophy ... and we so compartmentalize things that we no longer see the world for the boxes.
The world of reality is not divided up like that. Our author is a bit of a wanderer and I remember that that annoyed me a great deal reading the book. There's a stream of consciousness in it that causes the author to jump around and also to come back to recurrent themes often with a different slant each time. If you can get over the fact that that is confusing and annoying the book is an interesting read.
I don't think he offers realistic answers because he never really fully confronts the real problem. Nevertheless I liked the book for its insight into another man's view of a problem which I too see in our modern culture.
The problem is that we have divided up the world into little insulated boxes with labels on them like chemistry, physics, literature, philosophy ... and we so compartmentalize things that we no longer see the world for the boxes.
The world of reality is not divided up like that. Our author is a bit of a wanderer and I remember that that annoyed me a great deal reading the book. There's a stream of consciousness in it that causes the author to jump around and also to come back to recurrent themes often with a different slant each time. If you can get over the fact that that is confusing and annoying the book is an interesting read.
I don't think he offers realistic answers because he never really fully confronts the real problem. Nevertheless I liked the book for its insight into another man's view of a problem which I too see in our modern culture.
Read
January 26, 2022Kronman makes a good case for reviving secular humanism in American colleges and universities. Unfortunately, unless you have some Plato, Aristotle, and some amount of Western lit up your sleeve, some of Kronman's points might miss their mark. Some philosophy would also be useful.
Kronman is just a tad too suspicious of religious institutions for my taste, but I "forgive" him. This is, after all, a book for secular humanism ( which not too kind to religion in general). Still, I personally do not think having faith in God destroys your humanity and individuality, as Kronman quite blatantly opines. Coming from the Roman Catholic tradition, I hold the importance of both faith and reason very close to my heart. Those moments where Kronman dismisses religion as... intellectually fruitless... feel a bit insulting.
The chapters on political correctness and the role of technology/science in modern life are essential reading for anyone. It's easy to see why American society is as it is after reading through those chapters. They have value outside of the realm of education. I would recommend this book just for those two chapters.
I wonder how he feels about all the New Age and "affirmation" stuff floating around recently...
Kronman is just a tad too suspicious of religious institutions for my taste, but I "forgive" him. This is, after all, a book for secular humanism ( which not too kind to religion in general). Still, I personally do not think having faith in God destroys your humanity and individuality, as Kronman quite blatantly opines. Coming from the Roman Catholic tradition, I hold the importance of both faith and reason very close to my heart. Those moments where Kronman dismisses religion as... intellectually fruitless... feel a bit insulting.
The chapters on political correctness and the role of technology/science in modern life are essential reading for anyone. It's easy to see why American society is as it is after reading through those chapters. They have value outside of the realm of education. I would recommend this book just for those two chapters.
I wonder how he feels about all the New Age and "affirmation" stuff floating around recently...
May 14, 2013
There is a long, long shelf of books in this venue - what's wrong with college, how to fix it, etc. Kronman's is one of the *very best* I have read. The chief virtue is that it's literate: AK has read important books, and taught them to undergrads. He has thought deeply about the higher ends of higher ed, and he conveys his insights with passion and confidence. He makes a particularly strong case for the claim that the aims of the research university ought not to be imposed upon the humanities, where the principal effort should be not to augment our knowledge, bit by bit, but to invite students and a broader public into a vital conversation about big ideas. In turn, humanities professors need to ditch in-bred professional cant and re-commit themselves to their calling. My only complaint is the tired refrain, "Where have all the editors gone?" Chapter 4, on political correctness, is a rant and could have been cut in half. Still, this is a good book with an important message that tends to get drowned out by the shallow chatter cheering on the vocational ends of higher ed.
April 25, 2015
Made some fair points, if not a tad repetitive. I think the biggest failing of this book was vastly underestimating the huge impact of the cost of college now has on the psyche of students, who want to be assured they leave college with "marketable skills." To that point, the book discusses nothing about the horrendous corporatization of universities and the arms race between colleges concerning non-academic amenities (fancy gyms, dorms, cafeterias, etc.) Simply put, in addition to the two causes that have destroyed the impact of the humanities at the university and beyond (the research ideal and political correctness) you cannot discount the huge elephant in the room that is the non-stop raise in college tuition and the warped effect it has on people's priorities when people realize they simply can't afford to learn "how to live a good life."
March 24, 2011
Great Argument for Liberal Arts, a Bit of a Challenging Read
Very simply and quickly put, the book puts forth very challenging arguments for the Liberal Arts education and very critically and meticulously explains and narrates its problems, history, etc. Since the author is a lawyer, the book is very thorough if a bit dry for light/non-research/leisure reading.
Very simply and quickly put, the book puts forth very challenging arguments for the Liberal Arts education and very critically and meticulously explains and narrates its problems, history, etc. Since the author is a lawyer, the book is very thorough if a bit dry for light/non-research/leisure reading.
September 11, 2014
This book is largely an argument for Kronman's own chosen profession of teaching in the humanities and the -- as he argues -- insurmountable value that they provide over all other subjects taught in universities today. While he makes some interesting points, the overarching bias that this book encompasses makes more of a statement than his thesis.
July 10, 2013
I actually finished this one a while back, but never marked it. While it had a few good ideas and quotes, given the number of really good books about education - and particularly Classical Education - I wouldn't rank this one as one of the better ones.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 36 reviews