C.S. Lewis had a physical impediment he inherited from his father that restricted the range of motion in his thumb. He said that as a boy he dreamed of making models of ships and castles, but his disabled thumb made model-making difficult if not impossible. So he put his creative efforts into writing, creating imaginary worlds with words instead of paper and string. In essence, his impediment gave him the freedom to explore a way of experiencing the world that he might have otherwise missed. His disability prompted discovery of an ability. The same can be said of Isocrates. His weakness in oratory arts led him to re-imagine how he might experience the world of rhetoric; thus, he put his efforts into written argument and others were blessed by the sequence of events. Much has been written of Isocrates’s lackluster speaking skills, but perhaps he wouldn’t have become “the father of teaching” had he been a polished orator (is this where we get that terrible saying “those who can’t do teach”?).
I like that Isocrates puts an emphasis on writing as an intellectual (rather than practical) pursuit. He was promoting a “writing to learn” philosophy, what 2400 years before William Zinsser?
I wish I knew Greek, and could read and hear Isocrates’ prose in his native language. I know enough about Greek to know that Homeric poetry, written in dactylic hexameter, doesn’t translate well into English, a language more suited for iambic pentameter (Shakespeare’s preferred rhythm and meter). I think we can only approximate—never replicate—the prose of the Greeks, which is a shame.
I find it interesting that Isocrates finds fault with the sophists for professing to teach virtue, but demanding pay for it. Isn’t this what a university does? Isn’t this the model we use now?
Your connection between Isocrates and Zinsser is one that I also noticed.
ReplyDeleteI'm not convinced that the sophists were sharing the same quality/level/specialization of knowledge that a university dispenses. Maybe you're entirely right, and I'm layering too much of my own distaste for traveling evangelists into Isocrates' chastisement. I read the activities/actions of the sophists as a pre-Christian form of "have you heard the good news?" evangelism. No they weren't peddling Jesus and his apostolic followers, but I wondered as we were reading about the early sophists what the basis for the old fable "The Emperor's New Clothes" was and if it lay with the sophists.
What do you think? Would Isocrates have more of an issue with universities receiving tuition and fees or with someone handing money to evangelists wandering the neighborhood sharing their particular church's interpretation of "the good news"?
Maryn, the sophists model of education deserved to be criticized, I just thought it was interesting that Isocrates had a problem with the pay-before-you-play approach.
ReplyDeleteWhen I think of the sophists model of education and Isocrates's model, I can't help but to make comparisons to the American model (or at least the common one) and the British model. Except in doctorate-level education, most public American universities and private diploma mills (like University of Phoenix) are focused on retention, assessment (not of individual students but of studentbodies), graduation rates, etc. Of course, I'm speaking of the institutions, not of the individual professors, who primarily endorse intellectual pursuits over bottom lines. In that way, we are like the sophists. And, perhaps, that is what Isocrates was saying, that they are money grubbers who treated education more like a business than a virtue, and in that there was irony.
Isocrates's education model reminds me of the professor-as-private-tutor style of teaching at British Universities like Cambridge and Oxford. I think American universities come closest to this model in doctorate programs like ours, but it's almost absent in undergrad education.
Joy,
ReplyDeleteSpeaking of kairos we were just talking about this in my office Friday after seeing this article about Franklin Pierce University cutting programs http://www.sentinelsource.com/news/local/franklin-pierce-university-to-cut-six-academic-programs/article_903cba13-2550-5b0a-a9bf-3c671cd416f9.html
Speaking of intellectual pursuits vs. bottom lines...
"every university today has to make responsible financial decisions. If one academic area draws 50 new students and another only draws a small number, it doesn’t make economic sense to maintain the less popular program unless the university is very comfortable financially"
In addition to teaching, I am the academic advisor for about 200 English majors. I am constantly filling out Course Substitution forms and making concessions on graduation requirements because our institution will cancel a class that doesn't have 15 enrolled two weeks before classes begin, which often means students cannot possibly meet the coure requirements we demand of them. I'm not sure how an institution can justify not offering a class they've already determined is necessary for a student's graduation simply because it doesn't meet the red-versus-black threshold. I'm particularly baffled by this when that same institution spends millions on football and overseas recruitment trips, neither of which (at least at our school) ever pay for themselves. I'm positive this is not what Isocrates, "the father of education," had in mind when he began to organize a higher ed model.
Delete"His disability prompted discovery of an ability." Which in a way is at the core of the way we teach in U.S. grad schools. One studies until he reaches the limits of his abilities, then branches off into an intellectual corner to explore his navel. Just kidding...so you think that Isocrates would have been a fan of college sports? Remember that the Greeks (including Sophists) put an emphasis on physical as well as intellectual health.
ReplyDelete