The HigherEd Nonprofit vs. For-profit debate
...a continuation on my previous post.
There is something real and genuine that comes from reading good books and discussing them with other people who have read said books. I can't name it, I can't "brand" it, and I can't sell it.
But I know it's there.
Online for-profits are more agile institutions that react to market demands. I'm comfortable with that. I work at such an institution.
But the nonprofits engender and continue ("sell" in the parlance) a lineage, from Homer to Thomas More to Melville to today's leading thinkers, from Newton to Darwin to Einstein to Stephen Hawking. From Plato and Aristotle to Kant, Hegel, and Heidegger. PhD professors take passing on this lineage as seriously as do priests passing on their vocation. Do the PhD programs at the for-profits feel this grave?
There is something essentially bankrupt in purely practical learning. It makes us more economical but does not create meaning. Improved methods of genocide by the Nazis were a technological breakthrough, but a heinous, horrible, unimaginable one -- a practical breakthrough that never should have been. So too for the atomic bomb.
Advancement without understanding is meaningless. Educational models matter.
No profanes - sacred