Bp W Column: "University" Wasteland
#1
Dinoscopus Newsletter:

ELEISON  COMMENTS  CLVIII  (July 24, 2010) : "UNIVERSITY" WASTELAND.

"Several years ago when I wrote that girls should not go to university, a number of readers were shocked. But when I listen today to a young Professor who recently spent six years teaching English Literature in an English "university" (not the same thing as a true university!), it seems I should add that boys should not go either. Or they should at least think very hard before going, and their parents should think very hard before shelling out the expensive fees. Here, in order, is what the Professor observed, what he sees as its causes, and what he sees as its remedies.

In the "university"  where he taught, he observed no pursuit of truth nor education for truth. "Language is a game independent of reality, producing its own artefacts. The students are made to feel that everything is relative, there are no standards, values, nor moral framework nor moral reference. The sciences are infected with an evolutionism which opposes "science" to religion. The "Humanities" are degraded by a Freudian interpretation making everything centre on s-x. Professors tell students to have a s-x life because "it is good for them". These "universities" advertize their night life, and almost praise the sin against nature. They are utterly s-xualized.

"As for the professors, many recognize that there is a deep-down problem, but many continue to play the game. They are all Marxizing, if not Marxists. They teach as though all authority is stifling, all tradition oppressive. Evolution rules. As for the students, many more of them than one would think are yearning for something, but they are no longer looking to their "university" for truth. If they want a "Degree", it is only to get a job, and if they seek a good "Degree", it is only to get a better-paying job.  Rarely will they discuss ideas."

So what are the CAUSES of the university being turned into such a purely utilitarian processor of information to serve the established system ?  The Professor says, " The basic cause is the loss of God, resulting from several centuries of war on the Incarnation. Then education no longer means providing a truth or morality to live by, but rather developing one's potential to be different and better than anyone else. Into the vacuum left by Truth moves pop culture and the Frankfurt School, with their liberation from all authority. Into the vacuum left by God moves the State, which sees "universities" as a source of technocrats and engineers. Absolutes are of no interest, except one: absolute skepticism."

As for the REMEDIES  the Professor says, "These "universities" can hardly get out of the trap they have fallen into. To learn something genuinely useful a boy is better off at home, or talking to priests or going on a Retreat. Faithful Catholics must do things for themselves, and band together to re-build institutions of their own, starting maybe with summer schools. The Humanities must be restored, because they deal with the basics of human existence, what is right, good and true. The natural sciences, specific and derivative, must remain secondary. They cannot take priority of the Humanities. Let parents send their boys to these "universities" to get a job, but not to learn anything truly useful."

"The loss of God"  - all is said.

  Kyrie eleison"
Reply
#2
(07-24-2010, 03:52 PM)SaintRafael Wrote: The Humanities must be restored, because they deal with the basics of human existence, what is right, good and true. The natural sciences, specific and derivative, must remain secondary. They cannot take priority of the Humanities. Let parents send their boys to these "universities" to get a job, but not to learn anything truly useful."

Maybe I just drank too much coffee this morning and can't grasp what he's really trying to say (are boys supposed to go to college....or not??) but his saying that everyone should study humanities and that science should remain secondary is overly simplistic. Humanities are important, but some people are scientists, mathematicians, etc., and would be bored silly and wasting their time reading Milton for four years instead of preparing for their future.

One thing I DO like about B. Williamson is his emphasis on literature and humanities as a foundation for society, lest anyone accuse me of mud-slinging. Too much philosophy and abstraction going around these days.
Reply
#3
The good Bishop is begining to sound like Rush Limbaugh and Glenn Beck more and more  :laughing:

Of course Bishop Williamson is absolutely right.
Reply
#4
Bishop Williamson is saying boys shouldn't go to universities, but if they really really have to, in order to get a degree for the sake of a job or career that will help them support a family in the future, they should go in eyes wide open knowing that it is a sewer with no education, and that they will have to tolerate and bear with it only for the sake of the degree. Bishop Wiliamson would prefer that boys not go to college, but he knows some boys need the degree for the sake of a job. For this reason, college is only to get a job.

Reply
#5
Hmmm... while it is easily shown that there are many problems at universities (moral, educational, etc), I think it is more than a stretch to say that you don't learn anything when you go, that it is a "sewer with no education."  I for one certainly learned much during my years at university, much of which was useful.  And, of course, I had useless classes, too.  Generalizations are generally false ;)

I also never once in 10 years heard a professor tell someone to get a sex life, nor did I ever see the university advertising its nightlife.

This article is simply personal anecdotal hearsay attributed to an anonymous professor at an unknown university.  Not much intellectual or rhetorical rigor there.  I suggest that the good Bishop and his anonymous source take a few classes in how to present arguments effectively.  While there may be some truth behind what is being said, or perhaps a point to be made, it is certainly not being said well.

And yes, this does sound like Limbaugh or Beck, for all the wrong reasons.

Pax,
Jesse
Reply
#6
I disagree with you here Jesse.  Your own anecdotes aren't a proof against the Bishop's and "the professor's" conclusions.  My college experience was laced with teachers pushing perverted sex.  I remember one lecture, "God is Hermaphrodite" which was just expensive, silly nonsense.  If it weren't so long ago and I had the means, I would sue the colleges I went to for false advertising and fraud.

Gather a number of anecdotes and what you've got is data.  I believe the bishop was writing about the professor's conclusions based on observation over a period of time.  And I don't believe the bishop was submitting a paper for analysis since the column is called "comments" and he qualifies his position and recommendations  with "seems." 

And taking a few classes on how to present arguments effectively is akin to learning voodoo in order to perform surgery.  Communications classes on the craft of persuasion are about effecting people but they aren't about the truth. 

All one has to do to verify the truth of the lack of morals, the lack of standards, the attitude of relativism is to look at the graduates of colleges and universities particularly if you knew them before and after going to college. 

Reply
#7
I don't know what decade you went to college, Jesse, but I was in higher education for seven years in the last decade. The 00's or 2000s. 4 years in two junior/community colleges and 3 years in a university from 2001-2008 and some of 2009.

Everything Bishop Williamson said I have seen and heard. I have heard and seen worse. I have actually seen or heard worse from professors and students than what Williamson wrote. A lot worse. I got a million horror stories. Things are ten times worse than what Williamson writes about. In our modern atheistic secular world, things are always ten times worse than what we believe them to be. Modern universities and our education system in America is a complete disaster. Most college students and professors are a complete moral, psychological, mental, and spiritual mess. Most students are not even ready for college. They go there to learn to read and write. A lot of professors can't even teach.

Of coarse your learn some things in college, but learning and education are not the same thing. Knowledge and education are not the same thing. A real education is nowhere to be found anywhere in this country but in a half dozen liberal arts colleges that we can count by hand.

If anyone wants to see the disaster of a modern university, there is Tom Wolfe's book "I am Charlotte Simmons." It is a very vulgar book that no one should read without caution, but it captured university life of the last decade. The last five years have gotten worse since the '04 publication of the book.
Reply
#8
I agree with what Limbaugh and Beck say and what they say is if you want to get real education you have to do it on your own and not through the government education system.

In fact I would trust Beck University more than I would the liberal colleges and universities.
Reply
#9
(07-24-2010, 06:27 PM)Petertherock Wrote: I agree with what Limbaugh and Beck say and what they say is if you want to get real education you have to do it on your own and not through the government education system.

In fact I would trust Beck University more than I would the liberal colleges and universities.

Self-education is a good thing, but you have to go beyond the "conservatives" since they are cheerleading for their team regardless of truth or not.  More often than is wanted, Beck is wrong.  His recent lauding of Martin Luther King recently is going to bite him.  The amazing thing is he dismisses the fact that people are saying that King was calling for socialist style reparations as untrue, when people he trusts like Tom Woods acknowledge it in their own books.  Strangely, he brings Woods on the show to discuss literature and economics but never history.  You'd think for someone constantly harping on knowing history would defer certain things to an accomplished professional historian. 

Rush is usually a little more restrained,and I think he sees Beck going off the deep end by latching onto things he shouldn't.  He often contradicts him without mentioning him by name.  I remember him saying something along the lines of "You aren't going to solve these problems by gathering people in one place for a demonstration."  Which I agree with, the whole "rally" and "demonstration" thing reeks of a hippie mentality.  But of course Rush often loses me when he starts talking Israel and tax cuts and economics seem to be much more important to him than abortion and moral issues.

I tend to think Beck is a bit of a pied-piper more than a genuine, ideologically honest broker of ideas.  I listened to him for about a year or two regularly and then had enough.  I tune in periodically just to keep tabs but I don't think he's reliable.

Reply
#10
My son was in a state University getting technical degrees in the nineties, and he learned a lot. Neither was he deceived either by immorality or by moral relativism. He go bachelor degree from Math and Computer Engineering, Master degree from Computer Engineering.
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)