A man must use
his mind; he must feel that he is doing something
that will develop his highest powers and contribute to the
development of his fellow men, or he will cease to be a man.
Robert Maynard Hutchins
Quotes from Robert Maynard Hutchins: Great Books of the Western World, vol.
1: The Great Conversation: The Substance of a Liberal Education,
Encyclopedia Britannica, Inc., Chicago, 1952
“Until
lately the West has regarded it as self-evident that the road to education lay
through great books.” p. xi
“This
set of books is the result of an attempt to reappraise and re-embody the
tradition of the West for our generation.”
p. xi
“We
are as concerned as anybody else at the headlong plunge into the abyss that
Western civilization seems to be taking.
We believe that the voices that may recall the West to sanity are those
which have taken part in the Great Conversation.” p. xii
“...education
in the West has been steadily deteriorating; the rising generation has been
deprived of its birthright; the mess of pottage it has received in exchange
[for the great books] has not been nutritious; adults have come to lead lives
comparatively rich in material comforts and very poor in moral, intellectual,
and spiritual tone.” p. xiii
“The
reiteration of slogans, the distortion of the news, the great storm of
propaganda that beats upon the citizen twenty-four hours a day all his life
long mean either that democracy must fall a prey to the loudest and most
persistent propagandists or that the people must save themselves by
strengthening their minds so that they can appraise the issues for
themselves.” p. xiii
“...the
idea that liberal education is the education that everybody ought to have, and
that the best way to a liberal education in the West is through the greatest
works the West has produced, is still, in our view, the best educational idea
there is.” p. xiv
“...we
believe that the obligation rests on all of us, uneducated, miseducated, and
educated alike, to [go on educating ourselves all our lives].” p. xv
“[Adult
Americans] now have the chance to understand themselves through understanding
their tradition.” p. xvi
“Why
read Copernicus or Faraday if scientists now know everything that they knew,
and much more besides?” p. xxi
Quoting
James B. Conant: “What I propose is the
establishment of one or more courses at the college level on the Tactics and
Strategy of Science. The objective
would be to give a greater degree of understanding of science by the close
study of a relatively few historical examples of the development of
science.” p. xxi
“The
atmosphere we breathe today, because of the universal use of gadgets and
machines, because the word ‘scientific’ is employed in a magical sense, and
because of the half-hidden technological fabric of our lives, is full of the
images and myths of science. The minds
of men are full of shadows and reflections of things that they cannot
grasp. As Scott Buchanan has said,
‘Popular science has made every man his own quack; he needs some of the
doctor’s medicine.’” p. xxiv
“Much
of the background in Dante is in Euclid and in Ptolemy’s astronomy; the
structure of both the poem and the world it describes is mathematical.” p. xxv
“The
Advisory Board recommended that no scholarly apparatus should be included in
the set.... The books should speak for
themselves, and the reader should decide for himself.” p. xxv
“When
the history of the intellectual life of this century is written, the Syntopicon
will be regarded as one of the landmarks in it.” p. xxvi
“The
tradition of the West is embodied in the Great Conversation that began in the
dawn of history and that continues to the present day.” p. ___
Quoting
Sir Richard Livingstone: “We are tied
down, all our days and for the greater part of our days, to the
commonplace. That is where contact with
great thinkers, great literature helps.
In their company we are still in the ordinary world, but it is the
ordinary world transfigured and seen through the eyes of wisdom and
genius. And some of their vision
becomes our own.” p. 2-3
“This
set of books is offered not merely as an object upon which leisure may be
expended, but also as a means to the humanization of work through
understanding.” p. 16
“It
would seem that [education through great books and the liberal arts] is the
best for everybody... provided everybody can get it. The question, then, is:
Can everybody get it? This is
the most important question in education.
Perhaps it is the most important question in the world.” p. 17
“This
is not to say that the educational system should not contribute to the
physical, social, and moral development of those committed to its charge. But the method of its contribution, apart
from the facilities for extra-curriculum activities that it provides, is
through the mind. The educational
system seeks to establish the rational foundations for good physical, moral,
and social behavior. These rational
foundations are the result of liberal education.” p. 26
“By
the end of the first quarter of this century great books and the liberal arts
had been destroyed by their teachers.
The books had become the private domain of scholars.” p. 27
“Do
science, technology, industrialization, and specialization render the Great
Conversation irrelevant?” p. 29
“...specialization
[in the education provided], instead of making the Great Conversation
irrelevant, makes it more pertinent than ever.” p. 30
“...the
task of the future is the creation of a community. Community seems to depend on communication.... The effectiveness
of modern communication in promoting a community depends on whether there is
something intelligible and human to communicate. This, in turn, depends on a common language, a common stock of
ideas, and common human standards.
These the Great Conversation affords.”
p. 30
“The
experimental method [of science] has won such clear and convincing victories
that it is now regarded in some quarters not only as the sole method of
building up scientific knowledge, but also as the sole method of obtaining
knowledge of any kind.” p. 32
“...we
are often told that any question that is not answerable by the empirical
methods of science is not really answerable at all, or at least not by
significant and verifiable statements.
Exceptions may be made with regard to the kinds of questions
mathematicians or logicians answer by their methods. But all other questions must be submitted to the methods of
experimental research or empirical inquiry.
“If they are not answerable by these
methods, they are the sort of questions that should not be asked in the first
place. At best they are questions we
can answer only by guesswork or conjecture; at worst they are meaningless or,
as the saying goes, nonsensical questions.
Genuinely significant problems, in contrast, get their meaning in large
part from the scientific operations of observation, experiment, and measurement
by which they can be solved; and the solutions, when discovered by these
methods, are better than guesswork or opinion.
They are supported by fact. They
have been tested and are subject to further verification.
“We are told furthermore that the best
answers we can obtain by the scientific method are never more than
probable. We must free ourselves,
therefore, from the illusion that, outside of mathematics and logic, we can
attain necessary and certain truth.
Statements that are not mathematical or logical formulae may look as if
they were necessarily or certainly true, but they only look like that. They cannot really be either necessary or
certain. In addition, if they have not
been subjected to empirical verification, they are, far from being necessarily
true, not even established as probable.
Such statements can be accepted provisionally, as working assumptions or
hypotheses, if they are acceptable at all.
Perhaps it is better, unless circumstances compel us to take another
course, not to accept such statements at all.
“Consider, for example, statements
about God’s existence or the immortality of the soul. These are answers to questions that cannot be answered—one way or
the other—by the experimental method.
If that is the only method by which probable and verifiable knowledge is
attainable, we are debarred from having knowledge about God’s existence or the
immortality of the soul. If modern man,
accepting the view that he can claim to know only what can be demonstrated by
experiment or verified by empirical research, still wishes to believe in these
things, he must acknowledge that he does so by religious faith or by the
exercise of his will to believe; and he must be prepared to be regarded in
certain quarters as hopelessly superstitious.
“It is sometimes admitted that many
propositions that are affirmed by intelligent people, such as that democracy is
the best form of government or that world peace depends upon world government,
cannot be tested by the method of experimental science. But it is suggested that this is simply
because the method is still not fully developed. When our use of the method matures, we shall find out how to
employ it in answering every genuine question.
“Since many propositions in the Great
Conversation have not been arrived at by experiment or have not been submitted
to empirical verification, we often hear that the Conversation, though perhaps
interesting to the antiquarian as setting forth the bizarre superstitions
entertained by ‘thinkers’ before the dawn of experimental science, can have no
relevance for us now, when experimental science and its methods have at last
revealed these superstitions for what they are. We are urged to abandon the reactionary notion that the earlier
voices in the Conversation are even now saying something worth listening to,
and supplicated to place our trust in the experimental method as the only
source of valid or verifiable answers to questions of every sort.
“One voice in the Great Conversation
itself announces this modern point of view.
In the closing paragraph of his Enquiry Concerning Human
Understanding, David Hume writes:
‘When we run over libraries, persuaded of these principles, what havoc
must we make? If we take in our hand
any volume . . . let us ask, Does it contain any abstract reasoning
concerning quantity or number?
No. Does it contain any
experimental reasoning concerning matter of fact and existence? No.
Commit it then to the flames:
for it can contain nothing but sophistry and illusion.’
“The books that Hume and his
followers, the positivists of our own day, would commit to burning or, what is
the same, to dismissal from serious consideration, do not reflect ignorance or
neglect of Hume’s principles. Those
books, written after as well as before Hume, argue the case against the kind of
positivism that asserts that everything except mathematics and experimental
science is sophistry and illusion. They
state and defend propositions quite opposite to those of Hume.
“The Great Conversation, in short,
contains both sides of the issue that in modern times is thought to have a most
critical bearing on the significance of the Great Conversation itself. Only an unashamed dogmatist would dare to
assert that the issue has been finally resolved now in favor of the view that,
outside of logic or mathematics, the method of modern science is the only
method to employ in seeking knowledge.
The dogmatist who made this assertion would have to be more than
unashamed. He would have to blind
himself to the fact that his own assertion was not established by the
experimental method, nor made as an indisputable conclusion of mathematical
reasoning or of purely logical analysis.
“With regard to this issue about the
scientific method, which has become central in our own day, the contrary claim
is not made for the Great Conversation.
It would be equally dogmatic to assert that the issue has been resolved
in favor of the opposite point of view.
What can be justly claimed, however, is that the great books ably
present both sides of the issue and throw light on aspects of it that are
darkly as well as dogmatically treated in contemporary discussion.” p. 33-35
“[the
great books] afford us the best examples of man’s efforts to seek the truth,
both about the nature of things and about human conduct, by methods other than
those of experimental science; and because these examples are presented in the
context of equally striking examples of man’s efforts to learn by experiment or
the method of empirical science, the great books provide us with the best
materials for judging whether the experimental method is or is not the only
acceptable method of inquiry into all things.”
p. 37-38
“How
many valid methods of inquiry are there?”
p. 40
“What
is here proposed is interminable liberal education. Even if the individual has the best possible liberal education in
youth, interminable education through great books and the liberal arts remains
his obligation; he cannot expect to store up an education in childhood that
will last all his life. What he can do
in youth is to acquire the disciplines and habits that will make it possible
for him to continue to educate himself all his life. One must agree with John Dewey in this: that continued growth is essential to intellectual life.
“The twin aims that have animated
mankind since the dawn of history are the conquest of nature and the conquest
of drudgery. Now they seem in a fair
way to be achieved. And the achievement
seems destined, at the same time, to end in the trivialization of life. It is impossible to believe that men can
long be satisfied with the kind of recreations that now occupy the bulk of
their free time. After all, they are
men. Man, though an animal, is not all
animal. He is rational, and he cannot
live by animal gratifications alone; still less by amusements that animals have
too much sense to indulge in. A man
must use his mind; he must feel that he is doing something that will develop
his highest powers and contribute to the development of his fellow men, or he
will cease to be a man.
“The trials of the citizen now surpass
anything that previous generations ever knew.
Private and public propaganda beats upon him from morning till night all
his life long. If independent judgment
is the sine qua non of effective citizenship in a democracy, then it
must be admitted that such judgment is harder to maintain now than it ever has
been before. It is too much to hope
that a strong dose of education in childhood and youth can inoculate a man to
withstand the onslaughts of his independent judgment that society conducts, or
allows to be conducted, against him every day.
For this, constant mental alertness and mental growth are
required.” p. 52-53
“Yet
the great issues are there. What is our
destiny? What is a good life? How can we achieve a good society? What can we learn to guide us through the
mazes of the future from history, philosophy, literature, and the fine arts?
“These questions lie, for the most
part, in areas traditionally assigned to the liberal arts, the humanities, and
the social studies. If through this set
of books, or in any other way, the adult population of laymen came to regard
these issues as important; if scholars in these fields were actually engaged in
wrestling with these problems; if in a large number of homes all over the
country these questions were being discussed, then two things would
happen. It would become respectable for
intelligent young people, young people with ideas, to devote their lives to the
study of these issues, as it is respectable to be a scientist or an engineer
today; and the colleges of liberal arts and scholars in the humanities and the
social sciences would receive all the support they could use.” p. 56
“The
only civilization in which a free man would be willing to live is one that
conceives of history as one long conversation leading to clarification and
understanding.” p. 58
“Yet there will not be much argument against
the proposition that, on the whole, reasonable and intelligent people, even if
they confront aggressively unreasonable or stupid people, have a better chance
of attaining their end, which in this case is peace, than if they are
themselves unreasonable and stupid. They
may even be able by their example to help their opponents to become more
reasonable and less stupid.” p. 59
“The Great Conversation symbolizes that
Civilization of the Dialogue which is the only civilization in which a free man
would care to live. It promotes the
realization of that civilization here and now.
This set of books is organized on the principle of attaining
clarification and understanding of the most important issues, as stated by the
greatest writers of the West, through continuous discussion. Its object is to project the Great
Conversation into the future and to have everybody participate in it. The community toward which it is hoped that
these books may contribute is the community of free minds.” p. 60
“We
hear a great deal nowadays about international understanding, world community,
and world organization. These things
are all supposed to be good; but nothing very concrete is put forward as to the
method by which they can be attained.
We can be positive on one point:
we are safe in saying that these things will not be brought about by
vocational training, scientific experiment, and specialization. The kind of education we have for young
people and adults in the United States today will not advance these
causes. I should like to suggest one or
two ways in which they may be advanced.
“We should first dispose of the
proposition that we cannot have world organization, a world of law, without a
world community. This appears to
overlook the obvious interaction between legal institutions and culture. As Aristotle pointed out long ago, law is
itself an educational force. The
Constitution of the United States educates the people every day to believe in
and support the Constitution of the United States.
“World community, in the sense of
perfect understanding among all peoples everywhere, is not required in order to
have the beginnings of world law. What
is required is that minimum of understanding which is sufficient to allow world
law to begin. From that point forward
world law will support world community and world community will support world
law.” p. 62-63
“The
question for you is only whether you can ever understand these books well
enough to participate in the Great Conversation, not whether you can understand
them well enough to end it. And the
answer is that you can never know until you try. We have built up around the ‘classics’ such an atmosphere of
pedantry, we have left them so long to the scholarly dissectors, that we think
of them as incomprehensible to the ordinary man to whom they were originally
addressed. At the same time our
education has undergone so drastic a process of dilution that we are
ill-equipped, even after graduation from a respectable college, to tackle
anything much above the level of the comic book.
“The decay of education in the West,
which is felt most profoundly in America, undoubtedly makes the task of
understanding these books more difficult than it was for earlier
generations. In fact my observation
leads me to the horrid suspicion that these books are easier for people who
have had no formal education than they are for those who have acquired that
combination of misinformation, unphilosophy, and slipshod habits that is the
usual result of the most elaborate and expensive institutional education in
America.” p. 77
“If
you will pick up any one of these books and start to read it, you will find it
not nearly so formidable as you thought.
In one way the great books are the most difficult, and in another way
the easiest, books for any of us to read.
They are the most difficult because they deal with the most difficult
problems that men can face, and they deal with them in terms of the most
complex ideas. But, treating the most
difficult subjects of human thought, the great books are the clearest and
simplest expression of the best thinking that can be done on these
subjects. On the fundamental problems
of mankind, there are no easier books to read.” p. 78
“The
criteria for choosing each book in this set were excellence of construction and
composition, immediate intelligibility on the aesthetic level, increasing
intelligibility with deeper reading and analysis, leading to maximum depth and
maximum range of significance with more than one level of meaning and truth.” p. 78
“Do
you need a liberal education? We say
that it is unpatriotic not to read these books. You may reply that you are patriotic enough without them. We say that you are gravely cramping your
human possibilities if you do not read these books. You may answer that you have troubles enough already.
“This answer is the one that Ortega
attacks in The Revolt of the Masses.
It assumes that we can leave all intellectual activity, and all
political responsibility, to somebody else and live our lives as vegetable
beneficiaries of the moral and intellectual virtue of other men. The trouble with this assumption is that,
whereas it was once possible, and even compulsory, for the bulk of mankind,
such indulgence now, on the part of anybody, endangers the whole
community. It is now necessary for
everybody to try to live, as Ortega says, ‘at the height of his times.’ The democratic enterprise is imperiled if
any one of us says, ‘I do not have to try to think for myself, or make the most
of myself, or become a citizen of the world republic of learning.’ The death of democracy is not likely to be
an assassination from ambush. It will
be a slow extinction from apathy, indifference, and undernourishment.” p. 80
Quoting
Thomas Jefferson: “I know of no safe
depository of the ultimate powers of society but the people themselves; and if
we think them not enlightened enough to exercise their control with a wholesome
discretion, the remedy is not to take it from them, but to inform their
discretion by education.” p. 81-82
My email address is: Alan_Nicoll@Yahoo.com. Your comments are welcome. Join "The Great Conversation"!