Against The Removal Of General Education Courses By Bertrand Russell

Bertrand Russell: Russell would be against removing required general education courses. He believes that the study of philosophy can open the mind intellectually. Although he would be against the removal of general education courses, he maintains that if the person does not care about the study of philosophy they will waste their time. Additionally, Russell says that in order to have a valuable society, there must be some form of philosophy: “…The goods of the mind are at least as important as the goods of the body” (Soccio 8). Russell would also be against removing teachers who do not have internships or post-grad connections. He feels that education is more important for society than for monetary gain. This is seen when he mentions that

in order to maintain a valuable society you must not only focus on what is practical, material needs, but you must also focus on the mind. Lastly, Russell would be somewhat indifferent in regard to video game like learning. He is more concerned with actually obtaining the right information over how it is learned.

Paolo Freire: Freire calls the current education system the banking concept of teaching because students are seen as an empty bank account waiting to be filled by the teachers.

He argues that this is negative because it does not allow students to learn what they want; the system only generates conformity and a culture of silence. Further, he argues that students learning should be dictated by relevance not through the authority of a teacher. Because of this, he would be in favor of dropping general education courses. Freire would also be in against of eliminating teachers without post-grad opportunities. He would argue that students and teachers should be seen as equal, and therefore teachers with post-grad opportunities would not have the students’ interests in mind, even though teachers would argue otherwise. Being that Freire believes that teachers should teach the students to question the status quo, a teacher who pushes an internship or a certain post-grad job on a student would be seen as pushing the status quo on the students. Freire would say that students who are offered jobs by their teachers would be conforming and participating in the banking system of education. Lastly, Freire would be in favor of video game like learing. He would argue that this is a way in which teachers and students are seen as more equal. In this learning approach students can design games that help them learn, which gives them much greater mobility in determining how and what they

learn.

Deductive Logician: A deductive logician will look at things from the top down, or from general to specific.

For example, if students can graduate in three years, then the general education courses would be removed. In this example the deductive logician is looking at graduating in three years and going to be more specific saying that then general education courses would be removed. Also, deductive logicians would argue that teachers and departments that do not provide post-grad opportunities should be eliminated. They would say students want more post-grad opportunities, therefore teachers without post-grad opportunities should be eliminated. Lastly, a deductive logician would conclude that video game like learning would be detrimental to the school. They would use the logic that students want to spend less on college, therefore if video game like learning is adopted, then the startup cost of the program would increase the tuition of the

school.

Heraclitus: Heraclitus sees the soul as being extremely important. Therefore, Heraclitus would be against removing general education courses. He would argue that these courses are necessary when developing the soul, and it would not be worth it to graduate early if the soul has not yet been developed. Also, while it is not completely clear from the information given, I believe that Heraclitus would be for eliminating teachers and departments that do not have post-grad opportunities for students. Heraclitus says that most people are slumbering individuals who are enticed by conventional notions. He does not approve of laziness, and professors without connections or post-grad opportunities could be seen as unwise or lazy and, therefore should be eliminated. Heraclitus would be in favor video game like learning. He argues that everything is always changing, and this includes education.

Sophist: Sophists believe that truth is relative. They think that what you view as right is due to your upbringing and unique situation. Therefore, sophists would argue that general education courses are not needed because your views are already set. On the other hand, greedy sophists would disagree with letting the students graduate in three years because they would be paid less. Sophists conclude that everyone seeks some form of power. Therefore, if any educator or department could not produce jobs for their students they should be eliminated. If a department cannot help its students obtain power (a job) then they should not be employed by the school. Sophists would be against video game like learning because playing video games would not help in debating, which was a large emphasis for the sophists who would win a debate at any cost.

Socrates: Socrates believes that human excellence comes from a combination of technical understanding and practical skill. For this reason Socrates would argue that general education courses are necessary and should not be removed. With that being said, Socrates also mentions that payment should not be accepted for teaching philosophy, a key difference between him and the sophists. While this is not practical in todays world, it should be noted that Socrates would be against these extremely high tuitions. Socrates would not be for eliminating teachers who do not provide post-grad opportunities. He would argue, instead, that knowledge is knowledge (even if we cannot know anything), and money is not as important as virtue. Therefore, there would be no reason to eliminate the professors. Socrates would be in favor of using video game like learning to an extent. He stresses the importance of theoretical knowledge and practical knowledge; theoretical knowledge would be aided with the use of video game like learning. However, practical knowledge would need to be taught in a different way.

Euthyphro: Almost all we know about Euthyphro is he believes that whatever is religiously right should be done. Regarding general education courses, so long as they were religiously centered classes they should not be dropped, for example, theology courses. Being a sophist, Euthyphro would be in favor of eliminating departments and staff that would not provide adequate post-grad opportunities. He would argue this because in order to acquire power, as sophists assume all people do, they would need to receive good jobs. The professors who have no connections or post-grad opportunities would not be able to supply this need.

Plato: Plato would argue that it is necessary to keep the general education courses. He believes that in order for the mind and soul to be disciplined they must be exposed to many different forms of education like, mathematics, geometry, music, and others. However, Plato also says that only a select few are suited for learning ultimate philosophy. Plato would be for eliminating departments and professors that do not have post-grad opportunities. He would conclude this because teachers show the students the way, and if teachers cannot help students in future endeavors than they are not doing their jobs properly. Lastly, Plato would argue that video game like learning would be detrimental to students success because video game like learning is predicated on students self teaching. This goes against Plato’s ideology that teachers are important to a students success.

Aristotle:

Myself: I do not believe that general education courses should be eliminated. These courses provide students with some form of guidance on what they are truly interested in. It is not worth saving an extra years tuition to be locked in a major that you hate. General education courses make the school more attractive for these reasons. Also, teachers who do not have post grad opportunities and internships available should not be eliminated. Teachers are not there to give their students jobs. They are there to provide students with information that will enable them to find their own jobs. Students should not be babied by being given jobs that they do not work for.
Lastly, video game like leaning would make the school much more attractive for prospective students. However, learning with this method cannot be the only method offered to students. Video games have obvious limitations like removing the student from the classroom setting.