Thursday, December 16, 2004
Good question
Stephanie, in this, states:
These were the original liberal arts
trivium: rhetoric, dialectic, grammar
quadrivium: geometry, arithmetic, music, and astronomy
I guess anything could be a "liberal art."
(...except calculus, which is neither liberal nor art)
...disregard the calculus bit
Stephanie
This being in response to this post. I think it deserves something of an answer, for I feel that we as a culture have forgotten, first of all, what liberal means, second of all, what an art is, and thirdly, why a "liberal education" isn't supposed to mean going to math class to learn about the glory of abortion.
Continuing.
What is an art, first of all? Let's look at the good ole' dictionary:
A nonscientific branch of learning; one of the liberal arts.
A system of principles and methods employed in the performance of a set of activities: the art of building.
A trade or craft that applies such a system of principles and methods: the art of the lexicographer.
Skill that is attained by study, practice, or observation: the art of the baker; the blacksmith's art.
Skill arising from the exercise of intuitive faculties: “Self-criticism is an art not many are qualified to practice” (Joyce Carol Oates).
I think this is also related to the Greek word arete, which is often translated as virtue, but I'm not sure. At any rate, let's also consider the Latin word ars, which is the root of art. Defined:
ars N 3 3 NOM S F
ars, artis N F
skill/craft/art; trick, wile; science, knowledge; method, way; character (pl.)
So, it seems that basically an art is anything that involves a method, thinking about things, and studying. Or something. Now let's consider liberal. The dictionary, to put it mildy, sucks. Basically, it says free from stuff and modern, or traditional. In other words, if you look, it defines a "liberal education" as being the kind of education given at a liberal arts college . . . which isn't even recursive, it's just circular. Dumb. Though I didl like the last two definitions of liberal:
Archaic. Permissible or appropriate for a person of free birth; befitting a lady or gentleman.
Obsolete. Morally unrestrained; licentious.
At any rate, let's carefully consider this word. First, let's find it's opposite. No, not conservative, despite the modern usage. Just because people use words in a way that makes no sense, such as liberal to mean high-minded, doesn't mean you have to give in, though I have to admit I see how it flows from the earlier defintions of liberal as being thought befitting a gentleman. But here, of course, we hit the key point. Thoght befitting a gentleman.
A gentleman was a free man, back in the day. Liberal thought was free thought, as in, thought that had no servile end, not thought that had no conservative end. Thus we can distinguish the liberal from the servile arts. Baking is a servile art, an art that has an end, a telos, outside of itself: to make bread. Math is a liberal art, because you study it for math's sake, not for any other sake. Otherwise, you're not studying math, you're studying "applied math" or some such construction. Science isn't even an art, I think, because it's a science, though perhaps you could have liberal and servile sciences. Never really thought about that one.
So the liberal arts are those things that require skill, study, and method, like arts, don't require the scientific method, like sciences, and have an end in and of themselves, like dialectic logic. Or as the great Cardinal Newman puts it:
This process of training, by which the intellect, instead of being formed or sacrificed to some particular or accidental purpose, some specific trade or profession, or study or science, is disciplined for its own sake, for the perception of its own proper object, and for its own highest culture, is called Liberal Education; and though there is no one in whom it is carried as far as is conceivable, or whose intellect would be a pattern of what intellects should be made, yet there is scarcely any one but may gain an idea of what real training is, and at least look towards it, and make its true scope and result, not something else, his standard of excellence; {153} and numbers there are who may submit themselves to it, and secure it to themselves in good measure. And to set forth the right standard, and to train according to it, and to help forward all students towards it according to their various capacities, this I conceive to be the business of a University.
Now that is a very good book to read from. Pick up a copy or print it out off of the website. Thus, we have:
Dubium: I guess anything could be a "liberal art."
in Latina lingua: Cogito ut potest aliquem esse "artem liberalem".
Responsum: Non potest. Vide supra.
Signed,
Praefectus, Congregatio pro Doctrina Bloggi
Davidus Solimano, B.A. (almost)
Dies Martis, 16 Decembri 2004, Tertia Hebdomada Adventus
These were the original liberal arts
trivium: rhetoric, dialectic, grammar
quadrivium: geometry, arithmetic, music, and astronomy
I guess anything could be a "liberal art."
(...except calculus, which is neither liberal nor art)
...disregard the calculus bit
Stephanie
This being in response to this post. I think it deserves something of an answer, for I feel that we as a culture have forgotten, first of all, what liberal means, second of all, what an art is, and thirdly, why a "liberal education" isn't supposed to mean going to math class to learn about the glory of abortion.
Continuing.
What is an art, first of all? Let's look at the good ole' dictionary:
A nonscientific branch of learning; one of the liberal arts.
A system of principles and methods employed in the performance of a set of activities: the art of building.
A trade or craft that applies such a system of principles and methods: the art of the lexicographer.
Skill that is attained by study, practice, or observation: the art of the baker; the blacksmith's art.
Skill arising from the exercise of intuitive faculties: “Self-criticism is an art not many are qualified to practice” (Joyce Carol Oates).
I think this is also related to the Greek word arete, which is often translated as virtue, but I'm not sure. At any rate, let's also consider the Latin word ars, which is the root of art. Defined:
ars N 3 3 NOM S F
ars, artis N F
skill/craft/art; trick, wile; science, knowledge; method, way; character (pl.)
So, it seems that basically an art is anything that involves a method, thinking about things, and studying. Or something. Now let's consider liberal. The dictionary, to put it mildy, sucks. Basically, it says free from stuff and modern, or traditional. In other words, if you look, it defines a "liberal education" as being the kind of education given at a liberal arts college . . . which isn't even recursive, it's just circular. Dumb. Though I didl like the last two definitions of liberal:
Archaic. Permissible or appropriate for a person of free birth; befitting a lady or gentleman.
Obsolete. Morally unrestrained; licentious.
At any rate, let's carefully consider this word. First, let's find it's opposite. No, not conservative, despite the modern usage. Just because people use words in a way that makes no sense, such as liberal to mean high-minded, doesn't mean you have to give in, though I have to admit I see how it flows from the earlier defintions of liberal as being thought befitting a gentleman. But here, of course, we hit the key point. Thoght befitting a gentleman.
A gentleman was a free man, back in the day. Liberal thought was free thought, as in, thought that had no servile end, not thought that had no conservative end. Thus we can distinguish the liberal from the servile arts. Baking is a servile art, an art that has an end, a telos, outside of itself: to make bread. Math is a liberal art, because you study it for math's sake, not for any other sake. Otherwise, you're not studying math, you're studying "applied math" or some such construction. Science isn't even an art, I think, because it's a science, though perhaps you could have liberal and servile sciences. Never really thought about that one.
So the liberal arts are those things that require skill, study, and method, like arts, don't require the scientific method, like sciences, and have an end in and of themselves, like dialectic logic. Or as the great Cardinal Newman puts it:
This process of training, by which the intellect, instead of being formed or sacrificed to some particular or accidental purpose, some specific trade or profession, or study or science, is disciplined for its own sake, for the perception of its own proper object, and for its own highest culture, is called Liberal Education; and though there is no one in whom it is carried as far as is conceivable, or whose intellect would be a pattern of what intellects should be made, yet there is scarcely any one but may gain an idea of what real training is, and at least look towards it, and make its true scope and result, not something else, his standard of excellence; {153} and numbers there are who may submit themselves to it, and secure it to themselves in good measure. And to set forth the right standard, and to train according to it, and to help forward all students towards it according to their various capacities, this I conceive to be the business of a University.
Now that is a very good book to read from. Pick up a copy or print it out off of the website. Thus, we have:
Dubium: I guess anything could be a "liberal art."
in Latina lingua: Cogito ut potest aliquem esse "artem liberalem".
Responsum: Non potest. Vide supra.
Signed,
Praefectus, Congregatio pro Doctrina Bloggi
Davidus Solimano, B.A. (almost)
Dies Martis, 16 Decembri 2004, Tertia Hebdomada Adventus