I agree with you, though sometimes I wonder if the humanities cede too much ground this way. As if the arts have to prove their instrumental value vs intrinsic value. “What is it good for?” assumes it has to lead to something else to be worthwhile.
What is technology for? What is business for? What is money for? The onus should be on them to prove they lead to more imagination, more beauty, more leisure, more contemplation, more art, more stories, more music.
This is such an important message and one I've given much though to recently. The difficulty is in quantifying the effect 'humanity and the arts' have on both individuals and society in order to 'prove' its significance. A couple of great reads recently on this topic were Mary Midgley's What is Philosophy For? - a book that questions why science has been put on a pedestal (not anti-science at all, just wanting all disciplines to be at the debate table) and this article in the NYT. Will link both below
I agree with you, though sometimes I wonder if the humanities cede too much ground this way. As if the arts have to prove their instrumental value vs intrinsic value. “What is it good for?” assumes it has to lead to something else to be worthwhile.
What is technology for? What is business for? What is money for? The onus should be on them to prove they lead to more imagination, more beauty, more leisure, more contemplation, more art, more stories, more music.
I think their intrinsic value is clear but their instrumental value is under appreciated. It’s not exclusive.
This is such an important message and one I've given much though to recently. The difficulty is in quantifying the effect 'humanity and the arts' have on both individuals and society in order to 'prove' its significance. A couple of great reads recently on this topic were Mary Midgley's What is Philosophy For? - a book that questions why science has been put on a pedestal (not anti-science at all, just wanting all disciplines to be at the debate table) and this article in the NYT. Will link both below
https://www.bloomsbury.com/uk/what-is-philosophy-for-9781350051102/
https://www.nytimes.com/2023/03/24/opinion/yuval-harari-ai-chatgpt.html?referringSource=articleShare
Great links thank you
Reminds me of the motto of my alma mater— Facio liberos ex liberis libris libraque
"I make free men [adults] from children by means of books and a balance."
The true liberal arts are timeless.
Interesting perspective and take, and I must say, I have come from reading this a little bit more conscious.
Cool thanks
The problem is that narrative oversimplifies and distorts the facts, but yes there's some truth to this.