Spore Sprout read that the Straits Times reported recently on Dr Tony Tan's call for Singapore to look to American liberal arts college education (where "students study varied fields") for some ideas outside of "the current British model used by universities here--where a student studies a subject in depth." Dr Tan reportedly suggested that "the American liberal arts programme may be why the United States economy is 'more dynamic and more entrepreneurial' when compared with the traditional European ones." He also noted that "this is 'pertinent' with the changing world economy characterised by 'major restructuring of industries and the transitory nature' of jobs."
Lordy.
Over a quarter century ago, a letter to the editor of the same Straits Times argued to the same effect. An eager Singapore student in an American college argued the case for a broad liberal arts college education, warning against the risk of "becoming a specialised vocationalist inflexible in a world of fluid opportunities." The callow youth imagined that "in positions of high leadership, where complex situations and unpredictable circumstances abound, where no amount of special education can adequately prepare a man for the many contingencies of the job, the general-educated has an edge over the special-educated." Importantly, the writer of the letter wished it be known that financial aid was available from American colleges for indigent Singapore students to pursue a liberal arts college education.
Monday, April 12, 2010
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)


《论语•为政》“子曰:君子不器。”
ReplyDelete何晏《论语集解》引包咸曰:“器者各周其用。至于君子无所不施。” 下引邢疏云:“形器既成,各周其用。若舟楫以济川,车舆以行路,反之则不能。君子之德,则不如器物,各守其用,见几而作,无所不施也。”
朱熹《论语集注》:“器者,各适其用而不能相同通,成德之士,体无不具,故用无不周,非特为一才一艺而已。”