Why I Teach Plato To Plumber Summary

Looking at my neighbor, who works as a mechanic in auto repair I ask myself -- Does he need a philosophy or an art class to perform his job and be happy in life? Professor of philosophy Samuelson in his article "Why I teach Plato to plumber" insists how important his job is. He stresses the necessity to foster young minds, regardless class affiliation, by introducing them to liberal arts despite challenges created by a competitive economic-bureaucratic environment. Although Professor Samuelson provides very strong reasons for his position of offering liberal arts classes to nurses, janitors, and mechanics, taking a philosophy class should stay a privilege for those who mean its value, aka for the elite.

Professor Samuelson in his article

"Why I Teach Plato to Plumbers" is convinced that the liberal arts should as available for taking to a student at elite college as for a student in a community college. He argues that "there are future plumbers among many devotees to Plato as among the future wizards of Silicone Valley". That statement makes a strong point that all people are equal in the appreciation of philosophy. He asks why not to provide the equal opportunities for education regardless class affiliation of educational institution? Also, Samuelson feels that benefit-oriented logic creates people that might be defined as slaves, and to prevent that from happening, institutions should offer liberal arts and humanities and make them available.
Although the arguments of Professor Samuelson are strong, I think the best way to handle liberal arts is to leave it as a privilege of elite students.

In my view, offering classes to students whose minds and interests are distant from liberal arts is a waste of time and money. Why I have this opinion? First, while I was in medical college, students ignored philosophy and sociology classes there for the reason of being busy with major disciplines. Since they were mandatory classes in order to graduate, students got credits even for their rudimentary knowledge in liberal arts. This examples drives me to an idea, that making available liberal arts classes for broad range of students do not reach the goal, which is development of minds. Second, Samuelson argues that only the elite has an easy access to liberal arts, which is far from the truth. The education starts way earlier than in college. Every public school performs a screening tests annually to determine whether a student is capable of advanced education for gifted children. On the top of that, the education is free of charge. Furthermore, any adult who is able to read have an access to "high goods of humanity" through choosing certain books. All public libraries in the United States are also free, so you do not need a penny to develop your mind at any period of your life. Where is a will, there is a

way.
In conclusion, Professor Samuelson in his article describes good outcomes by offering liberal arts classes to all students, and those disciplines should be available not just for the elite. However, I feel that hanging out high valuable resources would be a waste of money and time. People who are interested in liberal arts and the humanities do not need a substantial amount of money to develop their minds.