Scan barcode
yliana's review against another edition
informative
reflective
slow-paced
4.0
unfortunately this book is even more relevant now than it was when it was published. we are definitely on the wrong path.
djbeyers75's review against another edition
2.0
I found this book to be a disappointing read. Rather repetitive and not terribly insightful, I question the reference to this book as a manifesto. It seems to me that there could be a much more thoughtful, broad survey of the decline of the humanities than what is offered here. While I'd hoped this book would do that, I guess I have to look elsewhere.
toniclark's review against another edition
4.0
A passionate manifesto in defense of the Socratic method and the humanities as a foundation for good global citizenship. Today, around the world and here in the U.S., education increasingly promotes curricula and teaching methods that foster economic growth over personal growth. Our schools promote marketability and maximize profitability, rather than critical thinking, personal accountability, tolerance, cooperation, and compassion. And it's always the humanities that get cut in a crunch. What I really appreciated about the book is the explication of the many ways that critical thinking learned through the study of literature, history, philosophy, etc.
I found the book engaging, but if you're not a champion of the value of liberal democracy, you might object. Science and technology are vitally important. But a democratic society demands broad knowledge, informed judgment, equitable distribution -- in short, a kind of morality that does not come from the study of science, technology, economics, and marketing.
Julian Baggini, writing in TPM (The Philosophers' Magazine), calls it an exemplary model of public philosophy. This fairly short text contains an awful lot to think about -- the content of what's taught, the manner in which it's taught, the matter of what we, as a society, value and how we foster it, and the consequences of making the wrong decisions now.
Cons: The text seemed to me a bit repetitive and the magnitude of the problem not always consistently portrayed (a crisis of massive proportions" vs. saying things are not so bad in U.S. universities). My own take is that it's a pretty serious problem. Humanities are being cut, are not valued as highly as science and technology by administrators (though I don't get the feeling that science is particularly valued by the general public!). It's hard (for me, anyway) to imagine how we can begin to turn things around.
I found the book engaging, but if you're not a champion of the value of liberal democracy, you might object. Science and technology are vitally important. But a democratic society demands broad knowledge, informed judgment, equitable distribution -- in short, a kind of morality that does not come from the study of science, technology, economics, and marketing.
Julian Baggini, writing in TPM (The Philosophers' Magazine), calls it an exemplary model of public philosophy. This fairly short text contains an awful lot to think about -- the content of what's taught, the manner in which it's taught, the matter of what we, as a society, value and how we foster it, and the consequences of making the wrong decisions now.
Cons: The text seemed to me a bit repetitive and the magnitude of the problem not always consistently portrayed (a crisis of massive proportions" vs. saying things are not so bad in U.S. universities). My own take is that it's a pretty serious problem. Humanities are being cut, are not valued as highly as science and technology by administrators (though I don't get the feeling that science is particularly valued by the general public!). It's hard (for me, anyway) to imagine how we can begin to turn things around.
sjentellll's review against another edition
2.0
This manifesto started out very promising but it soon went downhill for me. I get why it works on a broader audience but to me it felt like a comparison between Indian and American systems (which both include liberal arts and sciences with a tiiiiiiiiiny bit of humanities). All the while hating on the European way, so sad. Also, she could've better named the book "why liberal arts and sciences is the bomb" because that is all she talked about really.