Socrates, Democracy, and "Profit"

Martha C. Nussbaum. Not for Profit: Why Democracy Needs the Humanities. Princeton University Press, 2010.

Democracy needs an informed and articulate citizenry that can think critically, yet the academic disciplines which best develop such qualities are rapidly disappearing from the curriculum. In this book, philosopher Martha Nussbaum sounds the warning that “nations all over the world will soon be producing generations of useful machines, rather than complete citizens who can think for themselves, criticize tradition, and understand the significance of another person’s sufferings and achievements” (2).

In place of education for democracy, students are being offered education for economic growth. Such an education is invested in maintenance of the status quo, rather than inspiring youth to improve the world and the lot of its citizens. As Nussbaum puts it “educators for economic growth will not want a study of history that focuses on injustices of class, caste, gender, and  ethnoreligious membership, because this will prompt critical thinking about the present” (21).

A lot of what Nussbaum says is not new or surprising. Humanities types have been warning about this phenomenon for decades. What makes this book important is that it delivers its message in a clear and compact package, with none of the elitist sneering that characterizes a lot of such writing. Chapter IV “Socratic Pedagogy: The Importance of Argument” is brilliant and contains the core her message. It asserts that the chief contribution of Humanities education is that it turns everything into an argument. Argument is not mere contradiction and disagreement; it is the practice of continuous critical analysis, discussion, and questioning. It provides the basis of the scientific method and of sound reasoning in all other areas of human endeavor. As Ronald Reagan said, “trust, but verify.”

The enemy of Socratic Pedagogy is, of course, standardized testing. Nussbaum claims that “to the extent that standardized tests become the norm by which schools are measured, then, Socratic aspects of both curriculum and pedagogy are likely to be left behind. The economic growth culture has a fondness for standardized tests, and an impatience with pedagogy and content that are not easily assessed in this way” (48). Nussbaum demands that each student be treated as an individual “whose powers of mind are unfolding and who is expected to make an active and creative contribution to classroom discussion” (55). We habitually undervalue the skills that will make democracy vibrant and sustainable, the ones that foster innovation and creativity, in favour of test taking and regurgitation of facts.