In pursuit of knowledge: Liberal education as a public ideal of higher education

Abstract

Higher education has often been accused of its anti-social character, represented by the metaphor of the ‘ivory tower’. However, the idea of the pursuit of knowledge per se, which is associated with the ivory tower, has not been widely recognized as a public ideal of higher education. In this study, by drawing on the 20th-century British educational philosopher Paul H. Hirst’s theory of liberal education, I revisit and re-evaluate the Newmanian idea of pursuit of knowledge as an end itself as a public ideal for higher education. I argue that the public criteria provided by discipline-rooted knowledge are among the criteria that are most able to define and legitimise higher education. These public criteria are compatible with the distinctive nature of higher education, which is essentially aimed at adult citizens and linked to research as the creation of knowledge, and can even serve to legitimise the cognitive structure of the society.

Keywords:

• John Henry Newman
• ivory tower
• liberal education
• public criteria

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author.

Notes

1 In the discourse surrounding the concept of discipline, critics such as Barnett, who offer a pessimistic assessment, view it as confining constructs that imprison the intellect. According to Barnett, disciplines impose constraints on the ‘emancipatory’ cognitive development that students should ideally achieve through higher education, entrapping students within the boundaries of a specified framework of thought (Barnett, 1990, pp. 175–178). Nevertheless, Barnett’s advocacy for a ‘critical interdisciplinarity’, which seeks to transcend the barriers of individual disciplines and imbue them with emancipatory functions (Barnett, 1990, pp. 184–185), appears to fall short of recognising the role that disciplines play in establishing public criteria through the justification of knowledge. In this regard, the vision of higher education I espouse has a conservative character. However, I assert that it is precisely this conservative aspect that furnishes higher education with a public character, underscoring its pivotal role in the broader educational landscape.

2 Hirst’s doctrine of forms of knowledge has also been subject to constant criticism since its original publication in 1965. For example, Jane R. Martin criticises Hirst’s formulation of the forms of knowledge rooted in the discipline has adopted a masculine model of an educated person (Martin, 1998). Other criticisms have repeatedly been directed at the arbitrariness of the forms of knowledge enumerated by Hirst (e.g. Mackenzie, 1998; White, 2010, p. 50).

3 It is essential to emphasise that this perspective critically hinges on the moral commitment of the academic community to conduct research into adherence to ethical norms intrinsic to their respective fields of study. Hirst’s epistemological analysis of knowledge inherently presupposes that produced knowledge conforms to the criteria established by academic disciplines. This suggests a profound reliance on a system in which scholarly communities are bound by moral commitments that guide the rigorous pursuit of knowledge, embodying both the credibility and virtue of the academic ecosystem (cf. Markie, 1994; Shils, 1984).

4 From this argument which I articulated in this section, one might recall the role of ‘the lower faculty’, namely the faculty of philosophy, in Kant’s The conflict of the faculties (Kant, 2018). Indeed, my argument here is similar to Kant’s argument that the faculty of philosophy, from the standpoint of rational inquiry into truth, should scrutinize the truthfulness of its doctrines and educational content of the higher faculties consisted of faculties of theology, law, and medicine. However, in Newmanian and Hirstian arguments, there is no Kantian perspective of antagonistic power relations between disciplines; rather, the concept of ‘the pursuit of knowledge’ is conceived to generally justify the disciplines themselves. In this light, Kantian perspective might politically reinforce Newman’s and Hirst’s notions of liberal education.

Additional information

Funding

This study was supported by the Global Education Office of the Graduate School of Education, Kyoto University.

Notes on contributors

Kazuya Yanagida

Kazuya Yanagida is currently pursuing his Ph.D. at the Graduate School of Education, Kyoto University. His primary research interests are the philosophy of education and political philosophy. His doctoral thesis endeavours to reconstruct Wilhelm von Humboldt’s liberal educational ideas within the context of Anglophone political philosophies. He is also engaged in philosophical investigations of higher education, aiming to methodically reconstruct liberal education traditions while championing the fundamental aims of higher education.