PHILOSOPHY IN AMERICAN COLLEGES AND UNIVERSITIES.
We had originally intended, in this first number of The Monist, to present to our readers a comprehensive statement of the courses announced by American Universities in the departments of Philosophy, Ethics, and Psychology; first, in order to supply students proposing to pursue these studies and others interested, with information at first-hand, and secondly to give the non-academic world, which is considerable, an insight into what our higher professional schools are doing in these branches.
Since then The American Journal of Psychology has published a very full and gratifying account of the state of psychological research in our Universities, made up of the reports of the professors at the head of these departments; and we therefore refer our readers for information regarding this branch to the article entitled "Psychology in American Universities," published in Vol. III, No. 2, of that ably-conducted magazine.
It was also difficult to obtain the required information: most of our professors, in the last few months, having been absent from the university towns.
But reports from the most representative universities in different parts of the country have been obtained. They are intended merely to exhibit the general nature and extent of philosophical instruction in America and do not profess to be complete.
* * * * *
A review of the Registers, Catalogues, and Programmes of a large number of our colleges has led us to the conviction that the acquiring in America of a broad philosophical training is not the fault of the professions of our academical authorities. The courses offered are set forth in our college catalogues at very great length; they are very exhaustive; and their specification is accompanied with analyses of the work of the various departments and with bibliographical schedules that in point of thoroughness leave nothing to be desired. This fulness of exposition is noticeable in all the departments.
But under the obligatory system of study, the separate departments, or rather the professions of the separate departments, must certainly conflict: and the question arises in the mind of the observing outsider, To which is justice done?
And, except where a specialty is exclusively followed, wherein under the professed conditions, does the elective system differ from the obligatory? Only that in the one case, the student is made the author of his embarrassment, and in the other the victim of it. However, in the absence of a decided educational sentiment in our nation, and in the lack of a uniformity of opinion as to what must be demanded of our schools instead of a submissive acquiescence in what they give us, the question whether a college has fulfilled what it has professed, must be left to the faithful individual student who is forced to devote the best years of his life to the solution of it. It seems impossible to determine it otherwise. And yet, except in the case of our foremost institutions, to which all of us cannot go, this is true.
We have observed, too, that the extension of the departments of philosophy proper is not keeping pace with that of many other departments—as, for instance, the departments of history and economics.
Perhaps this is inevitable; the last-mentioned sciences having been until of late very much neglected.
But the tendency threatens to overbalance the curriculum; and where pretensions to universality are made, it is not justified.
On the other hand, the firm hold that experimental psychology has obtained in some of our foremost schools, is gratifying; though enthusiasm may also lead too far in this direction.
Lack of co-operation in cognate branches is, with very few notable exceptions, universal. Preparatory training is not emphasised. At least, where so much is said of the character and method of instruction, and where the elective system prevails, we should expect some mention of it. But it is not found.
Philosophy would seem to be something that is to be obtained only in the lecture-rooms of the "philosophical department," and in most cases it is sought nowhere else. The study of Mathematics, Physics, Natural Science, and Philology, is greatly neglected. Philosophy becomes an aim and a means in itself, and the student at the close of his course often discovers himself in the quest of philosophy, but with no means of finding it.
This necessity of co-operation has been fully recognised, for instance, at Harvard. "When a student applies for Honors," says Professor Palmer, "we require from him not merely an acquaintance with technical philosophy but also with the subjects most nearly adjacent to the special philosophical field he has chosen."
And so it is in other of our advanced and enlightened schools. Yet in the majority of cases, the foundations of philosophical culture are not insisted upon, but left to chance and the uncertainties of a universal elective curriculum.
Lastly, philosophy at some institutions exhibits a sectarian and theological complexion.
This, one thinks, might be left to the theological seminaries. But it is not.
We have Baptist Philosophy, and Presbyterian Philosophy, and denominational philosophies of divers other descriptions.
A president of a prominent Eastern University, (a gentleman to whom the philosophic spirit of this country is greatly indebted for inspiration and expansion,) has taken,—let it be remarked in this connection,—a much more liberal step, and urged the necessity of establishing a school of American Philosophy.
This is laudable; and in harmony with the present resuscitation of
American patriotism in——matters of learning.
It was this spirit that dictated the witty proposition of a Chicago gentleman to found a "school" of American Geometry.
* * * * *
We hope that the appended syllabuses of courses in philosophy will afford a general idea of the scope of philosophical teaching in America. The professors who have supplied us with the information we requested, we thank for their courtesy and obligingness.