Stanley Fish, an academic humanist, makes a bold claim about the utility of the humanities. He argues that their main purpose is to provide individual pleasure. They don’t reform, they don’t humanize, and they don’t help us understand the meaning of life, Fish asserts, because if they did, your English, philosophy, music, and history professors would be among the best people on earth (and you already know that they aren’t!).
Is Fish right? Scholars of history make war, writers of novels commit crimes, and gifted creative artists lose their lives to drugs and alcohol. And yet, it was a pamphlet that helped launch the American Revolution, it was music that helped empower a generation to oppose the Vietnam War, and a painting like Picasso’s Guernica is considered a national treasure in Spain.
What do you think? Can training in the humanistic disciplines do anything more than give us individual pleasure?
J.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
6 comments:
just seeing if i have the hang of leaving a comment
I think the humanities have a very dynamic potential. Studying history would allow people to disregard the frivolities of life (Freedom fries/Liberty Cabbage, Patriot Acts/Alien and Sedition Acts). Art History could inspire the next Gehry (contemporary) or Worhal (21st century revivalist trends). Even in the more mainstream the humanities serve as a basis for greater and more prosperous vocations. Lawyers often have BA's in history, english, political science, psychology, philosophy. The humanities inspire logic, reasoning, identifying patterns and learning how to manipulate them. Keep the humanities, keep the value of the letter.
I do agree that the study of humanities is primarily for personal pleasure, however I do not agree with the lack of attention and funding towards humanities. There are certain professions in our society that do not make the income that they deserve whereas other profession make way more than what they are worth. Greater attention and focus needs to be made towards humanities to help bring them back to life. Science and technology are important but they should not run the world. The study of humanities gives the individual a broad intellectual basis that serves as an important tool within the rest of society.
I don't beleive that the humanities is completely useless. I think that assuming that it has no significance whatsoever is a bit extreme. It's true that a book can't cure cancer but neither has science. I think it certainly can inspire people to become more aware of the world and get a sense of reality. For example, the "Kite Runner" showed people the horrible treatment people experienced under the Taliban. A whole race was being annihilated and we had no idea about it. I think the humanities can be quite helpful as long as you know how to use it.
Perhaps, as Stanley Fish suggests, we are asking the wrong question. Instead of asking what the humanities can do for us, we should try asking instead whether it is necessary for them to do anything at all. Humanities can be viewed as an end in themselves. Is it possible to put a "price" on a great work of literature (besides the $25.99 for the hardcover edition)? Should we even put a price on the humanities? It seems to me that regarding humanities as a means to an end cheapens them in some way. While science and technology provide the means to achieve something, humanities are a goal that we attempt to achieve--their worth exists in nothing but themselves.
I do agree, to an extent, that the study of the humanities is for personal pleasure however, I also believe that they have the potential to go way farther than that. As a part of the arts world, and speaking purely from a dancers perspective, most people outside the dance world assume that dance contributes nothing life changing to the world, that it is purely for entertainment purposes. However, dance therapy (which uses dance and movement to help with social, emotional, behavioral, and physical conditions) has helped many people learn to cope and live with their "problems", changing their lives forever. So in a way dance was looked at and analyzed and became something else, it became something that had the potential to change lives, much like the sciences and technology already do. Sure, something like this may not be on such a grand scheme as technology and the sciences are, but isn't it still doing the same thing just on a smaller level?? Just as the sciences and technology make a difference in our world so do the humanities, unfortunately their works and discoveries often times, I feel, go unnoticed or pushed aside by technology. I don't think you can necessarily compare the two side by side and see which one can offer us more in life, but we have to look at how they both can contribute in their own unique ways.
Post a Comment