Why are the arts celebrated? Why are STEM (science, technology, engineering, and math) programs heavily supported? Why are efforts to advance professions successful? Why DON’T we equally celebrate, support, and have success advancing non-arts humanities and social sciences?
The idea to write about non-arts humanities and social sciences comes from the confluence of pondering art competitions, professional conventions, the current political climate, and professors who hold doctoral degrees in all fields of study.
Growing up and currently living in Grand Rapids, Michigan has come with the privileged to witness first hand seven successful years of the art competition ArtPrize. Working downtown Grand Rapids, I see the multitudes of people attending professional conventions at the City’s DeVos Place Convention Center. Hearing comments from politically aware citizens that are recited material of cable news media makes me wonder what unique alternatives citizens can cultivate if given a clear and unbiased foundation.
Focusing on the non-arts humanities philosophy, why isn’t there something for non-doctoral philosophers to showcase their work as artists have with ArtPrize or professionals have with industry conventions? Is it that there isn’t a market for such competitions or conferences?
The latest utterance of candidates on the campaign trail, the stances they hold, and the opinions we have of the positions candidates take are often expressed in terms of “we should,” and “we ought” (sometimes disguised as “we must”). While the syntax is often more complex than what I am making it here, the derivatives of “should” and “ought” are simply philosophical normative statements. If these philosophical statements are innately created as opposed to with exclusive reference to national media, could there form a culture of “amateur” philosophy and a culture of publically celebrating this specific philosophy?
This is this point where philosophy meets the social sciences. While statements made by politicians and candidates as well as other political related news coming from Washington, D.C., state capitols, and city councils aren’t the only inspiration for creating philosophy, it can contribute to a major philosophical subfield: political theory. As I describe later, other social sciences like anthropology, economics, geography, history, psychology, and sociology can influence various types of philosophical subfields even when done by “amateurs”.
To answer why there are no competitions and conferences for amateur philosophers and social scientists, by the time we are finished with college (if privileged enough to attend college) the focus is on obtaining employment. We dedicate time – a lot of time – to finding careers. If philosophizing does not actively help secure employment or advance a career, the practice is left to those who have secured employment and are making a career of it, albeit a group almost exclusively comprised of academics holding doctoral degrees.
Maybe the real hope I have is to fulfil the dreams of Aristotle and Michael Sandel. According to them it’s acceptable we don’t celebrate, support and concentrate efforts on success in politics in the same way as we do for artists, STEM programs, and professionals. What we need to do is deliberate about the common good, and care for the fate of the community as a whole. Just as the best art determined by the public and experts win ArtPrize, well designed STEM programs receive relatively generous funding from limited resources, and the most adept professions have the highest paying careers among their peers or the most successful companies in an industry, those that have the greatest civic virtue should hold the highest offices.
Artists are measured by how their work interacts with our senses, STEM researchers by their and conclusions, and professionals by their skills and economic benefits. Social scientists are measured by their ability to identify the common good, knowing how to live the good life, and judgement in the face of tough decisions as Aristotle says through the words of Sandel. While Sandel may disagree with this point, one way to learn about how to live a good life and cultivate civic virtue is through engaging with social sciences and philosophy. When the historian, geographer, philosopher, economist, anthropologist, political scientist, psychologist, and sociologist in all of us work together, I think anyone can achieve a profound understanding of the good life.
