It has often been said that the purpose of higher education is to help students gain the skills necessary to find employment and thus become productive members of society. While it is certainly true that employment is one of the objectives of higher education, it is certainly not the primary one.We often observe students trying hard to “get out” of general education courses or cutting corners with respect to other classes by choosing those courses with minimal homework or reading requirements.Students major in subjects that they think will help them gain a position in the community, irrespective of whether they like the field of study or whether the education they receive provides a sense of orientation to the community in which they live.In democratic capitalistic societies, the sense of financial contribution and the idea of financial success is an overriding concern because providing for oneself and one’s family provides a sense of a positive self-worth.
Many political theorists, such as Joseph Schumpater and Judith Sklar, contend that meaningful employment should be the first goal of any democratic society.They argue that without the security of employment, civil society is precluded from attaining other goals that pertain to the good life.In fact, John Rawls argues that those who are advantaged in society should make way for those who are not when the desserts of society are distributed.Our welfare state has adopted this view and uses all sorts of policies to advantage those who are not on a level playing field.These arguments are hard to refute, especially when unemployment is high or when those who cannot compete with the advantaged are not given a chance to improve.However, there is an underlying principle of self-interest undergirded by rational choice theory, which calls attention to the fact that employment, remuneration and possessions are the fundamental desires and goals of our civil society to the exclusion of all others.
This view was born in the industrial revolution where in England, expanding markets and incipient capitalism had produced an upheaval in economic thought.In the second half of the 17th century, pamphlets on economic issues, often written by churchmen, argued against the traditional notions of just price, fair wages and controlled interest, and defended, as Joseph Lee wrote in 1656, the “undeniable maxime, that every one by the light of nature and reason will do that which makes for his greatest advantage.”Interest, he implied, was predictable, and therefore a firm basis on which to build.These pamphlets argued not only the necessity of self-interest, but also its ultimate good for the larger polity. As Lee further noted, “The advancement of private persons will be the advantage of the publick.”A key element in this reasoning was that the pursuit of self-interest was “natural” and trying to regulate it by, say, imposing fixed interest rates was unnatural and doomed to failure. “The supream power,” wrote Charles Davenant in 1695, “can do many things, but it cannot alter the Laws of Nature, of which the most original is, That every man should preserve himself.”These views of self-interest grew in economic theory until they found their ultimate expression in Adam Smith’s The Wealth of Nations.
In fact, the free exchange of goods and services (including labor) established by markets is the primary tenet of capitalism.Self-interest of one is to be balanced against all other self-interests, and thus an effective check to factions and special interests will have been created.Thus, the free market is the best way, according to pure capitalists, to provide the good life and the safest society.Governments are instituted to provide a level playing field and distract those who would collude to make the market more rigid and less elastic, but are not authorized to control or regulate the free market itself.There have been many who have criticized capitalism, the most severe critic being Karl Marx, but the verdict of history has recorded that no economic system has created a better vehicle to produce and distribute goods and services to a majority of people than has capitalism.
Having said this, however, there are still flaws in this system that need to be addressed.Welfare liberalism is one approach to correct the system in order that the playing field will be more fair.Fairness as justice captures this attempt.However, welfare liberalism and other economic adjustments or remedies do not address another primary concern of societies that only focus on economic issues. They still are fettered by self-interest, even if it is the self-interest of the less advantaged.
One of these flaws is an overemphasis on economic gain and wealth, expressed as self interest, as the primary goal of our civil society, as represented in both the libertarian and welfare liberal view.Education has become captive to this flaw and therefore students look only to the economic value of their education and discount the “weightier matters” when assessing the merit and significance of their years spent in college.The primary value of higher education is to teach students to think, to read, to write and to make arguments.
Students should realize that knowledge itself is its own reward.Students are not here at this university to be skilled.If students wish to gain a skill, please go to a trade school.Students are here to become educated and this goal should not be truncated with desires to short-circuit the process by eliminating courses that enhance that goal.Skills of learning how to critically think, how to write grammatically correct sentences, how to read discriminatingly and express oneself cogently carry over to all fields of employment.In addition, these abilities make students better citizens, better voters, better parents and better spouses.
William Leach, in his National Book Award work, Land of Desire, wrote, “The good is not in ‘goods.’The good is in justice, mercy, and peace.It is in consistence and integrity, in living according to truth and right.It inheres in men [and women] and not in things.It is other than the goodness of goods and without it, goods are not good.”In other words, self-interest that achieves great financial goals without a sense of inner virtue and selfless contribution is without significance.