Controversial article touching on Western Civ, classical education, and extremism

[Laurie4b]

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,518378,00.html

 

This article focuses on a group that promotes classical education and a return to an emphasis on Western Civ on the college campus, but also focuses on illegal immigration, etc. So the group does have a political side.

 

I'd like to discuss this without anyone going ugly--ok? I think the overall questions brought up are important for the classical community to be able to discuss. So to keep to board rules, can we leave out our stands on the political issues involved and discuss how classical education is perceived today on some campuses and whether there is merit to that perception?

 

Here is one quote from the article:

"'Western' is a veiled term that means 'white,'" University of North Carolina graduate student Tyler Oakley wrote in an e-mail to FOXNews.com. "I believe that our democracy is strong enough to allow extreme forms of speech, but YWC's message is essentially a negative one, an assault on not being white or non-Western, and is therefore hateful, if not blatant hate speech."

 

and another:

 

Jones said he's also disturbed by the group's call to restore a "curriculum that focuses on Western history, not political correctness," according to its Web site.

 

"They want to change the curriculum to emphasize 'classical learning' and get rid of 'trendy multiculturalism,'" Jones continued. "In practice this means firing professors with the wrong views and hiring those with the 'right' views.

 

"Even assuming there is a 'right' view on a given issue, the point is to get students to come to this opinion on their own, given the facts. In this way, YWC's views on education are inherently anti-intellectual."

 

 

If you click on the link in the article and go to the homepage of Youth for Western Civilization, you'll find their mission statement. In part it reads:

 

"Eventually, we would like to start changing curriculum on campus to restore an emphasis on real education and classical learning, rather than trendy multiculturalism."

 

So can we discuss this without injecting "right" or "left" politics into it, even though the article mentions those?

 

Also, can we discuss this sensitively and respectfully with respect to any ethnic issues involved?

 

Questions for us:

 

How would you dialog with someone who said that classical education and a curriculum that emphasizes Western Civilization automatically equate to right wing extremism?

 

Is classical education and the study of Western Civilization " code for white?"

 

Is there anything to the criticism that classical education emphasizing Western Civ does promote a sense of cultural superiority? Is there anything that you, as a classical educator, have done to broaden your study from "classic classical focusing on Western Civ--Greek, Rome, Europe, US" to something broader? Have you introduced material from other ancient cultures, current cultures, etc? What has been your reasoning?

 

I'll respond later on in the thread with my own pov, but wanted to open up the discussion with the article and the questions it raises about associations people have with "classical education."

Edited April 29, 2009 by Laurie4b1

[Julie in Austin]

I do think that some places over-emphasize minority groups/people to the neglect of traditional, mainstream history. By the same token, some approaches neglect the contributions of everyone save dead white European males.

 

Both sound like educational neglect to me. A solid education in history should cover all bases--the dead white males and the minority female household servants. It is all history. Kids (and college students) should learn about generals and politicians AND what their (probably female, probably minority group member) servants ate and wore and experienced.

 

it's all history. Neglecting any part of it to advance one's particular political agenda is educational malpractice.

[LaxMom]

How would you dialog with someone who said that classical education and a curriculum that emphasizes Western Civilization automatically equate to right wing extremism?

I have, in fact, had this dialogue. "Right wing extremism" is simply antithetical to my world view so, as a classical homeschooler, I really cannot make the leap that one equals the other. That said, however, I can see where one with such an agenda would use classical education - or any other genre of education - to that end.

 

Is classical education and the study of Western Civilization " code for white?"

It seems from their language, that they are using "classical education" as code for "white". Much in the way that people use "like minded" as code while assuming the person they are speaking with has a similar worldview. I don't think either is a term that all people assign similar meaning, though.

 

Is there anything to the criticism that classical education emphasizing Western Civ does promote a sense of cultural superiority? Is there anything that you, as a classical educator, have done to broaden your study from "classic classical focusing on Western Civ--Greek, Rome, Europe, US" to something broader? Have you introduced material from other ancient cultures, current cultures, etc? What has been your reasoning?

I can't answer this in real time, as my kids are young yet, but I feel that they are getting a fairly decent background of world cultures in our grammar stage history, and we plan to delve more deeply into non-European cultures when we begin logic stage history.

 

It is an interesting consideration. The charge of being an elitist, with goals of training my children to further a right-wing, conservative agenda has certainly made me more mindful of how/what I teach them, and what my ultimate goals are for their education.

[Danestress]

Questions for us:

 

How would you dialog with someone who said that classical education and a curriculum that emphasizes Western Civilization automatically equate to right wing extremism?

 

I think that the promoters of this organization are wrong to pin hopes on the idea that promoting an education emphasizing Western Civilization is really likely to result in their stated long term goal that, "the majority of students ... leave college more right wing than when they arrived." I am not sure that their political goals are best served by the educational initiative, not that I think a classical education that emphasizes Western Civilization is a bad one.

 

Is classical education and the study of Western Civilization " code for white?"

 

No. I don't think so. But the classical world was, itself, arguably "multi-cultural."

 

Have you introduced material from other ancient cultures, current cultures, etc? What has been your reasoning?

 

Of course I have. My reasoning is that my learning about other cultures is interesting, and life is not so short that I can't provide an education based on classical studies AND read interesting books about other places. Plus, I would prefer not to contribute to American ignorance of other people and places.

 

I'll respond later on in the thread with my own pov, but wanted to open up the discussion with the article and the questions it raises about associations people have with "classical education."

[dangermom]

We live in a different kind of world now; it would be ridiculous to only focus on the elite bits of Western Civ in an education. (It hasn't worked all that well for the past 100+ years to be ignorant about anyplace east of Istanbul; that's gotten us into some real messes.) Our kids are going to need a solid education in world history, real knowledge about societies and beliefs other than their own, and so on. Watered-down multicultural pap won't help, nor will ignorance.

 

I'm all for a solid education in Western classics, too. We do Latin and Greek and so on. But I think we need it all.

 

"Trendy multiculturalism" can be bad; but getting rid of anything that isn't officially "classical Western (whitewashed) history" is just as bad. I would say that both are extreme. I think the problem with the trendy part is that it's easy to get shallow and more focused on blame than on deep thought. And on the Western Civ end, it's easy to get shallow and have heroes, maybe, without thinking too hard about the real and serious issues inherent in human history. I think there is a form of Western Civ studies that can be a code word for 'white' and which can fail too look deeply at history. That goes against what I believe the goals of classical education to be, and what I want to do, but I do think it exists.

 

We use SOTW for grammar-stage history and so far I'm pretty happy with its world-history coverage. I'm reading through vol 4 to prep for next year, so I've read it all now and I've learned an awful lot I never learned in school. Of course we'll go deeper later on, but I do want to study history, culture, and religion from all over the world. That's not easy to do first-hand where we live, but we can at least learn about, say, the large Sikh community south of here.

[Sharon H in IL]

Eh. Other than its link to ISI, it doesn't look like it's much interested in classical education.

 

"How would you dialog with someone who said that classical education and a curriculum that emphasizes Western Civilization automatically equate to right wing extremism?"

 

I don't think I could; I probably wouldn't try because in my experience, people who hold such views don't seem to be open to modifying them. Life's too short if you want to still have time to go swimming and then home and read "Gulliver's Travels" to the kiddoes. :-D

 

Of course I teach the children about other cultures. History is our five-star subject, and we muck around in it till we have to stop to do math and Latin. Reluctantly.

[JennifersLost]

I think that group is mixing apples and oranges.

 

Classical education to me doesn't mean "western" education. It means adhering to classical standards of rigorousness and logical thought while you educate your children.

 

In other words, when I do a four year study of history, I don't exclude eastern history - in a perfect world we'd cover everything. Of course, we can't and we do emphasize the history that most pertains to us but this isn't because I'm biased against other cultures: it's because of a time constraint. I think that studying history in order is way more practical and logical than jumping around the world and around different times to get a little snippet of each culture.

 

I pair this way of studying history with other cultural studies - including geography, and the study of cultures around the world. Does that make sense?

 

I don't think there is a "western" math and a multicultural math. In literature it is easy to be classical in the sense of reading great works and multicultural in the sense of reading stuff from all over.

 

The reason schools have to be one or the other is that they have about half the time in the day we have to study. I always laughed when the kids were at school: they read one, maybe two novels per semester in English class (if that). We read several novels a week at home.

 

So my answer is, a true education shouldn't be either classical or multicultural: it should be both.

[Sebastian (a lady)]

Makes me wonder if Who Killed Homer? made the cut to move or if I stored it. There is a line toward the end of the book that I dearly love. It says something along the lines of the ideals of American democracy (individual worth, right to vote, restricted powers of government) are not multi cultural in that not all cultures value the fundamentals that make those ideals possible. But that the ideals are multiracial (meaning that no one is by color or ethnic background incablable of enjoying and thriving under those ideals).

 

American society has had a lot of influences, but it isn't fair to say that all influences have had equal weight. There is a trend of development from Athens to Rome through the Middle Ages and on to the growing recognition of the rights of man. There were many painful events along this development. But there is a lot to learn from both the steps back and the steps forward.

 

For example, King John signed the Magna Carta granting certain rights to his barons. But it took decades for the nobles to force the actual practice of what had been put down on paper. The Magna Carta is one of the documents that helped form the frame of mind that led to the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution. Then go a bit farther in history and compare the American Revolution to the terrors of the French Revolution and the rise and fall of Napoleon. How do either of these revolutions compare to Athens and Rome (both republic and empire)? Is there a difference in the 20th century history of former colonies of Britain and France? What about Germany or Italy, which unified much later?

 

I think that it is well worth saying over and over again that we do not learn nearly enough history. I'd love to say that it goes without saying, but I don't think it does.

 

I think that the history and presumptions of Athens, Rome, Western Europe and Britain had a disparate impact on forming US society. Yes we should learn lots about other cultures and histories (our family is spending the next year or more on the eastern hemisphere, especially Asia). But not at the expense of not learning about what formed our own.

[Spy Car]

How would you dialog with someone who said that classical education and a curriculum that emphasizes Western Civilization automatically equate to right wing extremism?

 

I'd say that an automatic equation of classical education with right wing extremism was wrong-headed, and that properly implemented a classical education would endow a young person with reason, the ability to think logically, and endow then with the kind of humanitarian values that would make them reject extremism (of either the right or the left).

 

But I would then have to admit that a not insignificant portion of those claiming adherence to "classical education" are misappropriating the term and are using it as a cover for teaching right wing political extremism and fundamentalist theology. With maybe a little Latin thrown in.

 

Is classical education and the study of Western Civilization " code for white?"

 

In the case of the group mentioned in the article it clearly does mean "white". You don't have to be a genus to see this is a white supremacist organization.

 

But I don't believe valuing Western Civilization, and finding it worth study, makes one a racist. Far from it.

 

Is there anything to the criticism that classical education emphasizing Western Civ does promote a sense of cultural superiority? Is there anything that you, as a classical educator, have done to broaden your study from "classic classical focusing on Western Civ--Greek, Rome, Europe, US" to something broader? Have you introduced material from other ancient cultures, current cultures, etc? What has been your reasoning?

 

I live in a very multicultural city with neighbors from all over the world and understand full well the contributions non-Western culture have made to the United States and the world. Its not hard to be open to a wider world, it's totally a natural part of our lives.

 

Bill

[SherryTX]

 

American society has had a lot of influences, but it isn't fair to say that all influences have had equal weight.

Yes we should learn lots about other cultures and histories (our family is spending the next year or more on the eastern hemisphere, especially Asia). But not at the expense of not learning about what formed our own.

 

 

 

WELL SAID!!

Here is my problem with "multiculturalism" in schools today: what the schools do is pick out stuff here in there from different cultures - like traditions, holidays, rituals, MAYBE a smattering of history - or just celebrating a culture's "differences" and they do no real teaching of history, nor teach the kids why the should care about the history of said culture or how it relates to the modern world, or had any influence on the world today.

 

I am ALL FOR world history! But I agree with what was written above. Too many schools forgo teaching solid history that will enable children to actually understand our country's history - which would help them understand our relationships with many other countries. Instead, the opt for touchy feely social studies lessons.

 

I also agree that classical education is a process of teaching things in the right order, it is not exclusive to Western Civilization.

[Rosie_0801]

How would you dialog with someone who said that classical education and a curriculum that emphasizes Western Civilization automatically equate to right wing extremism?

 

I would laugh because I am definitely not right wing.

 

Is classical education and the study of Western Civilization " code for white?"

Only by people with an agenda. As far as I know, "white" means descended from the British and Western Civilisation grew through Britain from the Mediterranean. Down there they have olive skin, don't they? (Thinking of the Dad in My Big Fat Greek Wedding, lol)

 

Is there anything to the criticism that classical education emphasizing Western Civ does promote a sense of cultural superiority?

Only if you were on a power trip already...

 

Is there anything that you, as a classical educator, have done to broaden your study from "classic classical focusing on Western Civ--Greek, Rome, Europe, US" to something broader? Have you introduced material from other ancient cultures, current cultures, etc? What has been your reasoning?

Actually yeah. I've been chewing over language choices lately. I want the kids to go to Saturday school, for a variety of reasons. I was pondering over whether I cared what language they learned and I've come out of it convinced they should learn Arabic. It's the lingua franca of the Muslim world, which is not something we have ready access to. I would imagine Muslims are going to be that "scary other" for some time and I think learning Arabic would be a good defence against all the hype, fear and silliness. It gets extra points for being an official UN language too.

My grandfather was Polish, and I still communicate with his sister. They are very patriotic people, and while I don't expect my kids to feel any real bond, I do and will include bits and pieces as I can. When I was over there I bought a great little book on the kings and queens of Poland. I will be limited by language, of course, but you never know what you'll find so I'll keep my eyes open. I have a Polish SCA persona too, which directs me towards resources I wouldn't find otherwise and I will be sharing that stuff with the kids. I am interested in Eastern Europe and Russia is a fascinating place. If I am interested in something, I have a habit of inflicting it on everyone around me :D

My sister is heading off to Kenya to possibly marry a Kenyan and settle there. If she does, I'll be making an effort to include what I can from there too. The Kenyan homeschooling website is in English and they get most of their resources from South Africa, so I'm tipping they have a history course available in English. (Not much use to me in Kiswahili, huh?)

I studied African history at uni and loved it, it was so new and exciting, and the joy of discovery is a wonderful thing. I want my kids to learn that history happened/ happens everywhere and to everyone. In their later years I hope to put some focus on Latin America and the Caribbean because that is a great case study for the powers of politics and economics, and will provide lots of fodder for discussions on ethics. There's room for ethical discussion in our own history, of course, but your own history becomes too familiar so aren't so good for these kinds of lessons.

 

Well, you can all see that I'm not actually schooling yet. I clearly have too much time to think ;)

 

Rosie

Edited April 30, 2009 by Rosie_0801

[Sebastian (a lady)]

 

In the case of the group mentioned in the article it clearly does mean "white". You don't have to be a genus to see this is a white supremacist organization.

 

But I don't believe valuing Western Civilization, and finding it worth study, makes one a racist. Far from it.

 

Bill

 

I totally agree with your second point, although I don't necessarily agree with the first. I think the linked to article went for juicy quotations that may or may not reflect the actual intentions of members of the student group. They may be all that is being claimed about them. Or maybe not. It do think that it has become all to easy to dismiss valuable works of literature as the irrelevant work of dead white guys. It is all to easy to disdain the study of history on a broad sweeping scale as being focused on western elites. It has become too fashionable for historiography to be focused on topics and issues that are quite trivial. Notice the trend for best selling history books written by authors who are not professional historians.

 

FWIW, I took a look at the entire list of recognized student organizations at UNC. This one is clearly more agenda driven that some (the Anesthesiology Interest Group for example) but there are other cultural and special interest groups that are also focused on bringing about social or political change.

[abreakfromlife]

I think there's a difference between Western. Civ and classical education.

[Laurie4b]

I would laugh because I am definitely not right wing.

 

Only by people with an agenda. As far as I know, "white" means descended from the British and Western Civilisation grew through Britain from the Mediterranean. Down there they have olive skin, don't they? (Thinking of the Dad in My Big Fat Greek Wedding, lol)

 

Only if you were on a power trip already...

 

Actually yeah. I've been chewing over language choices lately. I want the kids to go to Saturday school, for a variety of reasons. I was pondering over whether I cared what language they learned and I've come out of it convinced they should learn Arabic. It's the lingua franca of the Muslim world, which is not something we have ready access to. I would imagine Muslims are going to be that "scary other" for some time and I think learning Arabic would be a good defence against all the hype, fear and silliness. It gets extra points for being an official UN language too.

My grandfather was Polish, and I still communicate with his sister. They are very patriotic people, and while I don't expect my kids to feel any real bond, I do and will include bits and pieces as I can. When I was over there I bought a great little book on the kings and queens of Poland. I will be limited by language, of course, but you never know what you'll find so I'll keep my eyes open. I have a Polish SCA persona too, which directs me towards resources I wouldn't find otherwise and I will be sharing that stuff with the kids. I am interested in Eastern Europe and Russia is a fascinating place. If I am interested in something, I have a habit of inflicting it on everyone around me :D

My sister is heading off to Kenya to possibly marry a Kenyan and settle there. If she does, I'll be making an effort to include what I can from there too. The Kenyan homeschooling website is in English and they get most of their resources from South Africa, so I'm tipping they have a history course available in English. (Not much use to me in Kiswahili, huh?)

I studied African history at uni and loved it, it was so new and exciting, and the joy of discovery is a wonderful thing. I want my kids to learn that history happened/ happens everywhere and to everyone. In their later years I hope to put some focus on Latin America and the Caribbean because that is a great case study for the powers of politics and economics, and will provide lots of fodder for discussions on ethics. There's room for ethical discussion in our own history, of course, but your own history becomes too familiar so aren't so good for these kinds of lessons.

 

Well, you can all see that I'm not actually schooling yet. I clearly have too much time to think ;)

 

Rosie

 

Kind of off-topic, but English is an (maybe the) official language in Kenya. Swahili may be as well, but there should be plenty of stuff in English from Kenya. We have a fair number of Kenyan connections.

[Sebastian (a lady)]

I think there's a difference between Western. Civ and classical education.

 

I think that it depends who you ask. I don't think there is even a consensus on what is classical homeschooling (trivium, study of the classics, a Latin centered curriculum, chronological history study with Latin).

 

I personally think that it is a combination of a rigorous approach and a core curriculum that emphasizes what is put down as being Western but is still the fundamental theories and historical events that shaped the culture of the US.

[Wildiris]

I recently pick up David Denby's book Great Books from the library. In this book he goes back to Columbia University in 1991 to retake the two required core-curriculum courses he had taken as an undergraduate in 1961. These are two classes, Literature and Humanities and Contemporary Civilizations, and as you might imagine the reading list for these two courses for the two semesters included what most would consider the "Canon of Western Civilization." In the first chapter when the Literature and Humanities professor addresses the class he says, "This class has been under attack for thirty years. People have said the writers are all while Anglo-Saxon protestants. It's not true, but it doesn't matter. They've said they were all Dead White Males; it's not true, but it doesn't matter. That it's all Western Civilization. That's not quite true either--there are many Western Civilizations--but it doesn't matter. " (p31)

 

This professor goes on to say, "Don't get sucked in by false ideas. You're not here for political reasons. You're here for a very selfish reasons. You're here to build a self. You create a self, you don't inherit it. One way you create it is out of the past." (p32) In essence the reading will form you.

 

The Contemporary Civilization professor conveyed another point of view, saying that the selected reading "texts" were selected to form you. Henry Louis Gates, Jr. wrote, "The teaching of literature is the teaching of values...the teaching of an aesthetic and political order, in which no women, or people of color were ever able to discover the reflection or representation of their images, or hear the resonances of their cultural voices." (42) Gates argued for the expansion of the canon to include the missing voices.

 

When I read the article you posted earlier today I though that these young people were very reactionary; yet I hear their sentiment expressed a lot. I think our American culture is much to blame for this sentiment. When we want every thing cheap--cheap labor and cheap goods--we've elect to not pay our own children a living wage because we can hire an undocumented work to do it for less and exploit that worker. Many young people experience a kind of discrimination/competition for an average after school job with an undocumented worker who will work for less. In higher education and the higher level job market the competition is fierce. We, as a country, are not educated well enough for the demands of the global economy; we bring in brain power from other countries.

 

Although we are a country of many cultures, we are all Americans. Many come to this country proud to become American citizens and renounce their former citizenship, many come as undocumented workers and live for years paying taxes and contribute to our country.

 

I know this digresses, but one reason we have more of multicultural curriculum in our public schools is because of the huge illegal immigration into this country as cheap labor. This seems to be the thread these young people picked up.

 

I agree with Henry Louis Gates Jr., that the teaching of literature is the teaching of values, but whose values do we embrace and who decides?

[mcconnellboys]

I guess I'm a little perplexed. Many, many colleges and universities still offer Classical Studies majors, with varying aspects emphasized. I know this because that's what my older son is interested in majoring in and I'm currently scouring schools in my region for those offering just the right major. Many also still offer this type study under a "Humanities" label, a Great Books label, or one other that I'm drawing a blank on right now - liberal studies or something like that.

 

In checking general requirements for many schools, the general history of choice still seems to be Western Civ. Perhaps this has somehow changed, but I tend to think it couldn't have changed that much since I took it or they'd have to changed the name.

 

The problem I saw in college and that I still see at many schools is that there are not enough courses taught covering the ancient or medieval time period for non-Western cultures. There are some courses that tend to cover mostly modern history (read: politics) of non-Western cultures, but not true, full history courses.

 

So I'm not quite sure what students are talking about when they say they want to "get back" to a focus on Western history. Unless they are grad students unhappy with a non-Western emphasis among the professors at various schools, I can't guess what it is to which they refer....

[angela in ohio]

\"In practice this means firing professors with the wrong views and hiring those with the 'right' views.

 

 

:lol: Yes, that never happens now, does it? :glare:

 

Sorry, sarcasm aside, I agree with Sebastian exactly.

[IsabelC]

I don't think that focussing on Western history equates to priveleging Western/white culture. I happen to be a white person of Anglo-European descent, so classical is my cultural heritage. It also informs world events, since - like it or not - Western culture is dominant in the world. I certainly don't think that multiculturalism is a problem, nor do I see the history of my ethnic group as being in any way superior. On the contrary, I think that the many non-white and non-Western traditions have a wealth of wisdom and interest to offer. However, given that we have to start somewhere, it makes sense to me to begin with the traditional canon and then move on from there. So with literature, you start by reading 'dead white men', because that way, when you get to the great authors of African post-colonial literature, you actually understand what those writers are critiquing. (As has already been pointed out, classical vs multicultural is a false dichotomy.)

Edited October 13, 2009 by Hotdrink

[Heather in Neverland]

First, on reading "dead white guys"...I will give you a quote from a paper by Kathleen Nielson that sums up my opinion:

 

The flow of postmodern thinking has left in its wake a general strong suspicion that we have been duped. The works called “classics†do not after all hold intrinsic value or meaning; they are simply products of their writers and times, and the best we can do is to shape meaning for them through each new reader and time. Most works traditionally considered classics, at least in our Western culture, are thought now to be simply the oppressive expressions of “dead white European males.†In many intellectual circles, we are now called on to laugh at these works, condemn them, radically reinterpret them, or simply ignore them as irrelevant. It is important to acknowledge that, when we talk about reading classic works, we are, to say the least, going against the flow—but it is an exhilarating going, and a crucial one, especially if we can both look back and value what our heritage brings to us and at the same time continue the flow by looking around and ahead and receiving the great works to be discovered in our world today.

 

and

 

Consider Bill Moyers’ famous observation that we Americans seem to know everything about the last 24 hours but very little about the past centuries. No longer can we expect that people will know the stories of Romeo and Juliet, or Christian’s journey to the Celestial City, or Jonah and the whale. No longer can we speak of James Joyce’s Ulysses (or discuss the movie O Brother, Where Art Thou?) assuming the shared context of The Odyssey. We need, and we need to teach our children, to follow C.S. Lewis’ counsel to “keep the clean sea breeze of the centuries blowing through our minds,†which, he says, “can be done only by reading old books.†“It is a good rule, after reading a new book, never to allow yourself another new one till you have read an old one in between. If that is too much for you, you should at least read one old one to every three new ones.†Flannery O’Connor argued that “And if the student finds that this is not to his taste? Well, that is regrettable. Most regrettable. His taste should not be consulted; it is being formed.â€

 

On classical education, Western Civ, and racism....

 

I think there is room enough in the U.S. for colleges who want to focus on classical ed and/or western civ as well as colleges that want to offer a more "multicultural" type of curriculum and parents/students can choose what direction they want to go, just as they do with secular colleges vs. christian colleges. It doesn't make you a racist because you choose to go to a college with a classical bent. It's about choices for goodness sake.

 

What would I say to someone who thinks classical education in the university is about being "white"? Go to a different university then.

[EthiopianFood]

I think there is room enough in the U.S. for colleges who want to focus on classical ed and/or western civ as well as colleges that want to offer a more "multicultural" type of curriculum and parents/students can choose what direction they want to go, just as they do with secular colleges vs. christian colleges....What would I say to someone who thinks classical education in the university is about being "white"? Go to a different university then.

 

But why in the world WOULDN'T you want to read about what the world has to offer? Why should it be either/or?

 

I agree with most of what has already been said. One side question I do think needs to be addressed is why a person would value U.S. history more than another, or would mosty value the history of other areas in the world based on how they affect the West. Practically speaking, the answer is obvious. But we seek to be fully educated, not just practically so. I just keep thinking, if a person happened to be born in another country, that country would then be the "most important." I don't think this is postmodern garbage, but rather a logical reality. Why is one culture's history more important than another? One can be more INFLUENTIAL on a global scale, certainly, but in only teaching of these cultures, I think there is an underlying lesson in value as well, whether intended or not. This is why I don't agree with simply tacking on a little bit of nonwestern civ and calling it a day. Just because someone didn't have the money, connection, or influence to have their ideas published, that doesn't mean their ideas are necessarily any less valuable in understanding the human condition. Just because a person's life isn't noteworthy, that doesn't mean their life is less valuable than someone's who is in power. I think this is what "multiculturalism" was trying to address in the first place. Did some people go too far? Obviously, just like some go too far in focusing solely on "dead white men."

[Kate in Arabia]

In the case of the group mentioned in the article it clearly does mean "white". You don't have to be a genus to see this is a white supremacist organization.

I don't know about white supremacist, but they certainly have an anti-Islam agenda, starting with their logo. Why can't they extol the greatness of Western civ without making this a "west vs Islam" thing?

 

I took some western civ classes as an undergrad and they were incredibly informative. I personally have not seen anything comparable about other cultures, at least at my univ. Maybe things have changed since then, but in my day there was a whole dept for western civ and any other culture was simply a class or two that were attached to the relavent foreign language department.

Edited October 13, 2009 by Kate in Arabia

[stripe]

I also see that classical education (structure) could be different than studying western civ, but then in "Who Killed Homer?" the authors also are pretty far into the "rah! rah! Greeks!" chant that they do become anti-Islam/Muslims, in saying that only societies descended from the thought process and "big issues" of the Greeks embrace democracy and so forth, unlike those nasty Muslims who have no such process (their sentiments, not mine) and are anti-education (even that Gombrich book, Little History of the World, asserts that).

 

There is a grumpy knee-jerk reaction against multiculturalism or whatever, especially due to the sort of ethnic pride type things that emphasize somewhat or very insignificant people or questionable concepts, and this sort of "take us back to 'reality'" movement wants to say "all that is rubbish! Good things only came from Europe, except for the odd useless item and spicy food." Well, that is simply false. And to read history is to read from a certain perspective, and, yes, many times, even 100 years ago, entire continents were seen has having contributed nothing valuable to human civilization -- because those people who lived there were not even considered human. Research just why we even HAVE the works of the ancient Greeks and see why many of this is clearly false. Things are emphasized and de-emphasized according to how one perceives things.

 

That being said, I think, given that we are part of the western world, it is good to know our origins, in the long view, but without the framework that we are the only civilization. A well thought out study of other groups would be quite valuable, especially given the small world we now live in.

[Heather in Neverland]

But why in the world WOULDN'T you want to read about what the world has to offer? Why should it be either/or?

 

 

 

I don't think it has to be "either or" but these people who want to get rid of all the "dead white guys" obviously do. I do believe in learning about other cultures, their people, their history...that's one of the biggest reasons why I took this job in Malaysia.

 

But I don't believe that in order to be well-educated in the 21st century we have to turn up our noses and scoff at the dead white guys. Their works have stood the test of time for a reason.

 

I like having choices. I like having the choice to read only classical works or only works by people of color or only works written in the 18th century or all of them if I feel like it, without someone waxing philosophical about how "uneducated" I am according to "modern" standards.

 

So I stand by my original assertion...if you are attending a college that prefers to teach classical works and you would rather have a multicultural approach (or vice-versa) then SWITCH SCHOOLS. Don't try to force the school to change the curriculum for you.

[Catherine]

Civ, I think the real purpose of the group is somewhat different from how they are attempting to sell themselves. I find it outrageous that people shouted down a speaker who tried to tell the UNC campus about illegal immigrants who get taxpayer-funded scholarships. By the same token, it's pretty outrageous that the groups on-campus adviser threatened detractors with a gun! Hasn't anyone ever heard of passing the bean dip?? Well-the answer is that if they don't read our board, maybe not-and that is why they need to! LOL!

 

I think the study of history is incredibly important, of western and non-western. It's so sad to me that even the study of history has to be politicized.

 

ETA: I can't tell from a quick perusal, but there seems to be the suggestion that the group believes that study of cultures other than western is "bad"-I strongly disagree. We need to understand MORE about nonwesterners, not less!

Edited October 13, 2009 by Catherine

[plimsoll]

This, along with reading about the leftist politicization of most campuses, what seems to have developed into the quashing of rational debate on many campuses, and an almost violent rejection of rationalism and logic makes you want to consider the possibility of homeschooling through college...

[stripe]

But when "religious" groups' main emphasis is on stern discipline through beatings, creationism ONLY, and abstinence-ONLY education (not even encouraging marriage, but abstinence only), it's not exactly an inspiring alternative. There is too much polarization on both sides.

[dangermom]

I don't really understand your comment, stripe.:confused: There's an awful lot of middle ground between the extremes, and it seems to me you're giving a false either/or assumption there.

[eternalknot]

 

How would you dialog with someone who said that classical education and a curriculum that emphasizes Western Civilization automatically equate to right wing extremism?

 

I honestly don't mind if someone has that opinion. I can see why they might, and I'm more comfortable agreeing to disagree than I am in trying to engage in an emotionally-charged conversation. Life's too short!

 

Is classical education and the study of Western Civilization " code for white?"

 

It's too broad a subject to say with certainty. I mean, Western Civilization is focused on the West which is (in my mind) mostly white folks, so it would stand to reason that it could be construed as such (either positively or negatively). I'd imagine that the study of Western Civilization could be manipulated into "white cultural studies" but I'd also imagine that not everyone is doing this.

 

Is there anything to the criticism that classical education emphasizing Western Civ does promote a sense of cultural superiority?

 

I can see that it might do this, if indirectly. If this is the only view presented, it would stand to reason that some students may walk away from their educations incorrectly believing that Western civilization is superior because (a) it was the only or primary viewpoint studied, or (b) they never develop an awareness of (or interest in) Western civilization in the bigger picture of world history and geography.

 

Is there anything that you, as a classical educator, have done to broaden your study from "classic classical focusing on Western Civ--Greek, Rome, Europe, US" to something broader? Have you introduced material from other ancient cultures, current cultures, etc? What has been your reasoning?

 

I'm not a diehard "classical educator" so I absolutely broaden our cultural and history studies to extend beyond the western-centric model. It's very important (to me) to hyperfocus on certain developments in Western civilization, as it's so impacted our national culture; it's also important (to me) to study western civilization in proper context of world events and cultures. We spend a significant amount of time discussing Ancient civilizations from all parts of the globe.

 

Part of my reasoning is also derived from very ignorant misconceptions that people I know have had - fellow students at school, other adults even within the homeschool community, random people at social functions. People don't realize the rich contributions that non-Western cultures have given to the world, and mistakenly believe that we are what we are today ONLY because of the Western influence. (And I don't mean silly nods to world cultures like they do with the well-intentioned but ridiculous attempts at multi-cultural education at schools ... more like technological and scientific contributions that non-Western civilizations had long before or simultaneous to Western civilizations.)

[Audrey]

I find their premise of replacing "trendy multiculturalism" with "classics" amusing. This is an example of a small group of extremists making bigger headlines than they are warranted (why am I not surprised?). If they wanted a righty-whitey education, that is easy enough to find. There are plenty of colleges that cater to their ilk.

 

I believe they do not understand, at all, what a Classical education is. They are confusing Classical education with the teaching of the Western Canon. That fundamental lack of understanding on their part quite negates the assertions they have about how education should be implemented.

 

FWIW, I am generally a champion of teaching the Canon, but I do not believe that having studied the Canon is the completion of a classical education. Far from it -- the world is bigger than that. The Classical scholars studied all they could of the world as they knew it. One pursuing a truly Classical education should follow that example.

[stripe]

I don't really understand your comment, stripe.:confused: There's an awful lot of middle ground between the extremes, and it seems to me you're giving a false either/or assumption there.

Actually, I do believe there's a lot of middle ground, but many of the most vocal people take really extreme points of view that are hard to deal with on their own, much less reconcile with the other. You were the one who said there is no debate allowed on college campuses, and that only "the left" dominates, while my point is that there is extremism on both sides that we need to see beyond.

[dangermom]

I did? I don't think that was me; can you point me to where I said that? I can't find it.

 

If I did say that, please keep in mind that I went to Berkeley. ;)

[Spy Car]

If I did say that, please keep in mind that I went to Berkeley. ;)

 

Go Bears! :D

[EthiopianFood]

I don't think it has to be "either or" but these people who want to get rid of all the "dead white guys" obviously do. I do believe in learning about other cultures, their people, their history...that's one of the biggest reasons why I took this job in Malaysia.

 

But I don't believe that in order to be well-educated in the 21st century we have to turn up our noses and scoff at the dead white guys. Their works have stood the test of time for a reason.

 

I like having choices. I like having the choice to read only classical works or only works by people of color or only works written in the 18th century or all of them if I feel like it, without someone waxing philosophical about how "uneducated" I am according to "modern" standards.

 

So I stand by my original assertion...if you are attending a college that prefers to teach classical works and you would rather have a multicultural approach (or vice-versa) then SWITCH SCHOOLS. Don't try to force the school to change the curriculum for you.

 

The article was about people who want to get rid of "multiculturalism," not the dead white guys. I guess I"m confused why you're not emphasizing that these people should be the ones to switch schools. And if something doesn't seem right, isn't it appropriate to bring it to the attention of the relevant parties? This is how positive change is enacted, like with the school (Bob Jones??) that didn't allow interracial dating until they got a bunch of flack for it. I don't know, I like having options as well, but I don't find it offensive or oppressive to point out institutional racism where it occurs, just as it shouldn't be seen as offensive to want to keep the dead white guys. :)

[Heather in Neverland]

The article was about people who want to get rid of "multiculturalism," not the dead white guys. I guess I"m confused why you're not emphasizing that these people should be the ones to switch schools. What I emphasized is that ANYONE who is not happy with the type of education they are getting can switch schools...including the people in this article. I don't think it is right for them (or anyone) to voluntarily enroll in a college that has a multicultural bent then demand that they change. i also don't feel you should enroll in a college that has a western canon bent and then demand that they change. that's like enrolling in an art school and then demanding to be taught engineering.

 

And if something doesn't seem right, isn't it appropriate to bring it to the attention of the relevant parties? Ahhh, but now you are making judgments about what is "right" and that's where things get sticky. We all have different opinions of what is "right" which is why having options is a much better idea than forcing everyone to conform to one way of doing things.

 

This is how positive change is enacted, like with the school (Bob Jones??) that didn't allow interracial dating until they got a bunch of flack for it. But if they are a private institution and not supported by the government (not sure if they are or not) then they get to make their own rules. I have no problem with interracial dating. Heck, I have an interracial family myself. But that's the beauty of a free-market society...you can always "shop" somewhere else. At the school where I work the kids wear uniforms and there is no dating of any kind allowed. We are a private, non-government-funded Christian school. We get to make our own rules. If someone doesn't like uniforms or wants their teenager to date, go somewhere else.

 

Homeschoolers seem to be all about keeping the government out of our business and making our own rules. It is interesting to me that we don't want to extend that privilege to others.

 

I don't know, I like having options as well, but I don't find it offensive or oppressive to point out institutional racism where it occurs, just as it shouldn't be seen as offensive to want to keep the dead white guys. :)

.

[EthiopianFood]

Homeschoolers seem to be all about keeping the government out of our business and making our own rules. It is interesting to me that we don't want to extend that privilege to others.

 

 

Lobbying for change is completely different than forceably denying someone's rights. I also fail to see how making a greater variety of classes denies anyone their rights. :confused:

[Heather in Neverland]

I also fail to see how making a greater variety of classes denies anyone their rights. :confused:

 

My point is it's not like that particular university is the only university aailable and therefore we need to make sure that they offer every kind of major to cater to every desire of every student. You don't go to law school to get a medical degree and you don't go to a school known for it's focus on western canon expecting to receive a multicultural education (or vice-versa). I would rather my children attend a school that specialiazed in what they want to major in than a school that is trying to be something to everyone.

[EthiopianFood]

My point is it's not like that particular university is the only university aailable and therefore we need to make sure that they offer every kind of major to cater to every desire of every student. You don't go to law school to get a medical degree and you don't go to a school known for it's focus on western canon expecting to receive a multicultural education (or vice-versa). I would rather my children attend a school that specialiazed in what they want to major in than a school that is trying to be something to everyone.

 

I have a feeling this could go on and on, so I'll make a final point. Most colleges have a liberal arts focus, not just Western Civ. Obviously a person could just go to another college, and I'm sure that is appropriate sometimes. At the same time, I don't think it is inconsistent, unreasonable, or demanding to ask an institution why they aren't providing their students with a well-rounded education. Most colleges aren't truly specialized in the way you are saying. Why have students take a variety of courses from a variety of fields if it isn't to expose them to the main topics that influence our world?

[Heather in Neverland]

I have a feeling this could go on and on, so I'll make a final point. Most colleges have a liberal arts focus, not just Western Civ. Obviously a person could just go to another college, and I'm sure that is appropriate sometimes. At the same time, I don't think it is inconsistent, unreasonable, or demanding to ask an institution why they aren't providing their students with a well-rounded education. Most colleges aren't truly specialized in the way you are saying. Why have students take a variety of courses from a variety of fields if it isn't to expose them to the main topics that influence our world?

 

Yes, we will have to agree to disagree because now we are venturing into the whole "well-rounded" education topic which is an entirely different thread...;)

[NoPlaceLikeHome]

I do think that some places over-emphasize minority groups/people to the neglect of traditional, mainstream history. By the same token, some approaches neglect the contributions of everyone save dead white European males.

 

Both sound like educational neglect to me. A solid education in history should cover all bases--the dead white males and the minority female household servants. It is all history. Kids (and college students) should learn about generals and politicians AND what their (probably female, probably minority group member) servants ate and wore and experienced.

 

it's all history. Neglecting any part of it to advance one's particular political agenda is educational malpractice.

 

:iagree::iagree:

[stripe]

I did? I don't think that was me

 

You're right -- it wasn't you! Sorry about that.

[Reya]

They want to change the curriculum to emphasize 'classical learning' and get rid of 'trendy multiculturalism,'" Jones continued. "In practice this means firing professors with the wrong views and hiring those with the 'right' views.

 

 

They fear this only because the opposition, so to speak, has been overtly politicizing academia for decades now. Many universities are now a political engine for promulgating a certain point of view rather than an academic--in the purest sense--refuge.

[Reya]

The Greeks-only argument is somewhat fatuous for a number of reasons, but I do find it astonishing how much WESTERN culture has come from the Near East. Philosophy didn't start in Athens--it was imported from Asiatic Greek colonies. It amazes me what percentage of the world's intellectual heritage comes from such a tiny sliver of land--Anatolia and the Fertile Crescent, together.

 

And Hellenistic Egypt... Could you imagine, if left unconquered, what it could have become in 500 years?

 

Wow.

[stripe]

Even the Greconization/Romanization of names suggests the people involved are of a different nationality than they really were.

[tdeveson]

Gosh, I don't see how they make the "classical=conservative" leap. I've been a liberal all my adult life, and I have always taught a Classical curriculum.

 

I guess I just didn't get the memo.