≡ Menu

Of Passion and Education

There has been a lot of press, recently, arguing what the point of a college education is supposed to be. The debate seems to have been sparked by the publication of a book titled Excellent Sheep: The Miseducation of the American Elite and the Way to a Meaningful Life, by a former English professor named William Deresiewicz.

While education per se is not really something I talk about on this site, and I haven’t read Deresiewicz’s book, the concepts of passion and of crafting a meaningful life are topics very germane to the idea of No Map. No Guide. No Limits. But first, a little background on the debate:

Deresiewicz, it appears, believes that a higher education is too focused on achievement and performance, at the cost of “smothering students’ souls,” as a New Yorker article put it. Deresiewicz believes that college should be a time when students “stand outside the world for a few years,” and engage in the job of “soul-making.”

Standing in opposition to that idea is the counter-idea that the point of college is some combination of two goals. The first is “teaching knowledge” (a viewpoint, The New Yorker said, espoused by UC Vice-Chancellor Robert Nisbet in a 1971 book titled The Degradation of the Academic Dogma). The second, according to a New York Times column by David Brooks, is teaching students how to think, and think critically, a viewpoint articulated by Harvard Professor Stephen Pinker, in response to Deresiewicz’s book.

David Brooks summarized the different viewpoints as “three distinct purposes for a university: the commercial purpose (starting a career), Pinker’s cognitive purpose (acquiring information and learning how to think) and Deresiewicz’s moral purpose (building an integrated self).” And The New Yorker article criticized Deresiewicz’s position for being “distinctly middle class”:

“Deresiewicz suggests that someone who grew up poor should be at least as eager to turn down the lucrative consulting job and take a risky road as anybody else. ‘If you grow up with less, you are much better able to deal with having less,’ he counsels. ‘That is itself a kind of freedom.’ The advice seems cheap. When an impoverished student at Stanford, the first in his family to go to college, opts for a six-figure salary in finance after graduation, a very different but equally compelling kind of ‘moral imagination’ may be at play.”

Ah. Now we are in No Map. No Guide. No Limits. territory. After all, I spend an inordinate amount of time pondering questions of where voice, passion, and fulfillment come from, how to find them, how important they are, and how and when anyone should make the call to leave a more predictable or secure path and try something riskier but potentially more “fulfilling.”

So where do I stand on this debate? Strangely enough, the question of what a college education is for is one I’ve given a lot of thought to, and we’ve talked about in our household a lot, recently, because I have two stepsons currently trying to decide whether or not a college education is worth it.

My take is this: a college education, ideally, should provide a student with at least a basic, working understanding on a variety of topics, including history, mathematics, science, the importance and complexity of social/psychological/sociological factors and influences humans are subject to, around the world, and throughout their lives. Oh, yes. And a working knowledge of how to write and communicate effectively. You can’t get far in anything – even a pursuit of a passion – if you can’t present yourself competently. And without any knowledge of history or “context” factors of society, psychology, or how flawed reasonable-sounding theories can be, your own decisions will be, by default, flawed.

I also agree with Pinker that learning how to think–and how to research information and sources so you can analyze the quality and veracity of the information thrown at you–is a critical task; indeed, one that we ought to be teaching every child by the time he or she graduates from high school. But if we don’t manage to teach it to students in high school, then for sure, they should be learning it in college. Ideally, that skill would be integrated into how every single subject was taught. And ideally, even those basic subjects I listed above could be taught in such a way as to highlight how they relate to each other, and why they matter, in a practical world. “Why does this matter and what can we learn from this” should be attached to every fact presented in a classroom–not just for the sake of that subject, but because those questions are critical to integrate continually throughout your life, if you’re to keep growing, evolving, and learning from your experiences.

But what about learning or encouraging passion, adventure, and risk-taking? I think, actually, that what a university can reasonably do in this area is to encourage exploration. That’s a skill and value that a student can employ, and follow, their whole lives, regardless of what job they take after graduation. I don’t think passion can be taught. And as The New Yorker article rightly pointed out, risk-taking is an equation every person has to balance for themselves, and there is no right answer for everyone. I do not espouse chucking a good-paying job to start a risky self-employment or adventure dream for everyone, regardless of obligations, family, or other considerations. But even that first-generation college student going into finance could leave college valuing, and with a commitment to, a continued exploration of life, knowledge and possibilities. Being engaged in life, and finding fulfillment, does not begin and end at the workplace.

I was encouraged to explore at an early age. And before long, I discovered that I actually had a passion for exploration itself; for the process of seeking what else might be out there to know, experience, be challenged by, or puzzle through. I was also lucky enough to stumble on the realization that writing, when I did it, resonated with me in a way that I could imagine doing it every day for the rest of my life. But the key point in both of those discovered passions is that the “passion” came from exposure to something. From trying it out and realizing it made me feel really wonderful to be doing it. To tell students to “follow their passions” is a bit of the cart before the horse. Few 20-year-olds have already discovered the things they love most to pursue, and even those may change over time. So far better to encourage them to explore, since the process of remaining open to new experiences, activities, thoughts, professions and people over the years will increase their chances of stumbling across things that ignite a sense of “passion” in them.

I had no great inherent passion for having children, when I was in my 20s and 30s, but I had a great passion for exploration, independence, and controlling my work environment. So the choice of quitting a corporate job and pursuing a life as a self-employed adventurer and writer made sense for me. My husband’s overriding passion when he was in his 20s and 30s, on the other hand, was to be a father. More than anything else, he wanted children, and he wanted to be an involved parent, and to provide a warm and safe and comfortable environment for his kids. That driving passion dictated a very different career track for him. One could deride him for taking the safe “corporate job” route. But the truth his, he’s as fulfilled with his life’s path as I am. He embraced his highest passion, just as I embraced mine, even if our engagement in the things we do to make a living is different. Key to our happiness, however, is that we both have continued to explore life; questioning and learning and adjusting as we go, and seeking new experiences and knowledge along the way.

Can a college teach that? Probably not. But it can encourage it in its students, not only by how it teaches its courses, but by how much it encourages outside learning and internships, and by how much leeway it gives its students to follow questions that interest them, vs. just memorizing material for a test (although, to be fair, there are some subjects, foreign languages and math included, that boil down to a need to memorize, if they’re going to be of any use). Teach some basic knowledge, understanding, and skills, teach and encourage critical and integrative thinking, and encourage both exploration and a love of learning, and a student is much more likely to “develop a soul,” or stumble on things that ignite passion in them and bring them fulfillment, long after they graduate. They will also be better equipped to function well in the world, be a positive influence on their communities and society, and choose wisely, when it comes to the trade-offs all of us have to balance in our careers, families, and lives.

Oh, yes. And if I didn’t mention “prepare for a particular career field or job market” in all of that–it’s because I believe that if my ideal university accomplished all of the above, the career/job market thing would take care of itself. Learning, after all, doesn’t end with graduation if you have a passion for exploring.

{ 2 comments… add one }
  • Dave October 2, 2014, 6:13 am

    I just attended my university’s homecoming celebration. 40 years since graduating with a BS in Engineering. I struggle to remember most of the courses, but those that are still alive in me encouraged exploration. Read the book, memorize the formula and then try to apply it in the real world. Does it make sense? And then the great question not found in the books, “How can we make it better?” Regardless of the field of study, that’s what I want the universities to teach our students; to pursue (with passion) ways to make our world better.

  • David October 14, 2014, 9:55 pm

    Doctor, farmer, plumber, retailer, engineer, or even pilot whatever path (or paths) we choose all greatly benefit from solid business and accounting knowledge. Every pursuit requires money coming in and going out. I have known very bright physicians who were completely astounded when they discovered their practice was a small business. They had the best of medical training but were lost when they needed to accurately project income and expenses if they were going to stay in business.
    The pilot who has a good financial background can not only do what they love, but will accurately project what it is going to cost to operate the “business of flying” and keep the doors open.
    I have known too many very bright passionate people who were not able to pursue their passion because they were ill equipped to manage the financial aspects of their pursuits.
    If every Bachelors Degree came with a requirement equal to a minor in business those who earn them would be far better equipped to live life fully.
    On the other hand if more students did a cost benefit analysis of higher education costs compared to earnings expectations from their degree there would be fewer student loans to be paid off over many years…..with interest.
    Money is not the key to happiness but it sure helps along the way.

Leave a Comment