The classics can be a good introduction to fundamental topics. However, those who have dissented with Mr. York ignore the opportunity cost of slogging through a sprawling work instead of looking to contemporary examples.
Because the classics have been drilled into us from an early age, we confuse their comfortable integration into our own lexicons with their utility. Everyone before me read Plato. In order not to sound like an idiot I must also read Plato or at least be able to feign knowledge of who he is and what he thought. However, this excessively complicates learning in the social sciences and philosophy, which I would argue is more positive or logical /mathematical than historical. Students need practice reading difficult, messy -even ancient – texts and encountering primary sources. But educators must be honest that texts that display the above characteristics are not the best for clearly and efficiently conveying theoretical knowledge in the social sciences- unless you have a mentor to slap you upside the head with a ruler everytime you doze off.
It is true as Mr. Renautus pointed out that ignoring great ideas because they are no longer in vogue is dangerous. A case in point is Marx, whose ideas most social scientists today would disagree with but continue to shape ideology around the world. However, there is no need to slog through the biblical “Das Kapital” when a few quote-laden pages can introduce us to “economic determinism” or “class consciousness.”
We may scoff at jargon-ridden academic journals, but would anyone with only a “humanist” education purport to read a journal in mathematics or engineering without sufficient training. Many not particularly arcane modern day authors in economics, psychology, and philosophy journals are quite difficult to read without a knowledge of mathematics, statistics and logic as well as some understanding of the context of the current debate. This is because their disciplines have far developed in complexity beyond Freud, Adam Smith, and Plato, as we would hope after a few hundred years. If we want to grill students we should be pushing them towards an understanding of these tools rather than those of another era. The generalist, sprawling encounters with ideas of the classics are only adequate for introducing those unfamiliar with basic concepts.
But before running back to the past for an introduction, consider if discussing “The Matrix,” or “Pleasantville” or any other movie you may have already seen, will yield a less thought-provoking discussion than reading Plato’s myth of the cave. Why use the obscure etmolygies of the Cratylus to discuss philosophy of language when the wordplay of Alice in Wonderland or Bugs Bunny really leads us to the same conclusions about the slippery nature of names and identity. Who says learning can’t be fun?
No Comments