Liberal education has value
I am writing this letter in response to Kirk Hazlett’s letter (Letters, June 10, page 8) and to other articles in the Taipei Times recently that have placed the value of “work experience” and “job skills” above the value of a liberal education and the ensuing diplomas that students earn.
My view will be scoffed at by the more hard-nosed wage-earners and other functionaries out there, many of whom paid not much attention at all to their college education, spending their time honing “skills” for sale in inflexible job markets. And it is not that I am against developing skills for jobs or even simply for one’s own pleasure and fulfillment. As much as anyone, I have been happy that I learned Chinese, Spanish, how to play guitar and how to fix electric fixtures in my home, though they have had little to do with any jobs I have had.
The key is that the value of a liberal education should not be dismissed. Studying arts and humanities (literature, fine arts, culture, history and law, philosophy and religion) has long been a foundation of a valuable education, which can lead to employment in any number of fields.
Alongside this study of course is scholarship in a variety of other subjects in math and science, politics and economics, education, social sciences, etc. Indeed, during my upbringing some years ago in the US, a “liberal education” was considered the vital conduit to future success and accomplishment. Not computer science, not business, not software engineering, not Web design (though there is nothing inherently wrong with any of these majors).
Most importantly, the valuable attributes of the liberal education in these respects are not only academic and scholarly aspects. They are also seen as the groundwork of excellent and proper citizenship, and right-minded participation in civic affairs leading to a best public discourse. This is an area Taiwan might indeed focus on.
“Education can give you a skill, but a liberal education can give you dignity,” the great Swedish feminist Ellen Key said.
In an age that seems to be valuing utilitarian job qualifications for nations of cubicle slaves, copyists and other paper pushers, the value of a liberal education should not be forgotten.
David Pendery
National Taipei College of Business,
Taipei
Recently, China launched another diplomatic offensive against Taiwan, improperly linking its “one China principle” with UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 to constrain Taiwan’s diplomatic space. After Taiwan’s presidential election on Jan. 13, China persuaded Nauru to sever diplomatic ties with Taiwan. Nauru cited Resolution 2758 in its declaration of the diplomatic break. Subsequently, during the WHO Executive Board meeting that month, Beijing rallied countries including Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Belarus, Egypt, Nicaragua, Sri Lanka, Laos, Russia, Syria and Pakistan to reiterate the “one China principle” in their statements, and assert that “Resolution 2758 has settled the status of Taiwan” to hinder Taiwan’s
Can US dialogue and cooperation with the communist dictatorship in Beijing help avert a Taiwan Strait crisis? Or is US President Joe Biden playing into Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) hands? With America preoccupied with the wars in Europe and the Middle East, Biden is seeking better relations with Xi’s regime. The goal is to responsibly manage US-China competition and prevent unintended conflict, thereby hoping to create greater space for the two countries to work together in areas where their interests align. The existing wars have already stretched US military resources thin, and the last thing Biden wants is yet another war.
As Maldivian President Mohamed Muizzu’s party won by a landslide in Sunday’s parliamentary election, it is a good time to take another look at recent developments in the Maldivian foreign policy. While Muizzu has been promoting his “Maldives First” policy, the agenda seems to have lost sight of a number of factors. Contemporary Maldivian policy serves as a stark illustration of how a blend of missteps in public posturing, populist agendas and inattentive leadership can lead to diplomatic setbacks and damage a country’s long-term foreign policy priorities. Over the past few months, Maldivian foreign policy has entangled itself in playing
A group of Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) lawmakers led by the party’s legislative caucus whip Fu Kun-chi (?) are to visit Beijing for four days this week, but some have questioned the timing and purpose of the visit, which demonstrates the KMT caucus’ increasing arrogance. Fu on Wednesday last week confirmed that following an invitation by Beijing, he would lead a group of lawmakers to China from Thursday to Sunday to discuss tourism and agricultural exports, but he refused to say whether they would meet with Chinese officials. That the visit is taking place during the legislative session and in the aftermath