If a course, especially philosophy, can't justify its existence in all the hours of lectures, it has problems. It's fine to study something for the sake of stu

If a course, especially philosophy, can't justify its existence in all the hours of lectures, it has problems. It's fine to study something for the sake of studying it. I have no problem with a course on basket-weaving because it's an art and worthy of attention in its own right. As a center for higher learning that explores the full human experience, it's entirely justifiable that a university should consider a course in basket-weaving. But the academy is a human institution and subject to decay. More concrete courses like math are constantly checking themselves and anyone can work through proofs and say, "no, this is wrong," and get people back on track. Your basket-weaving course, on the other hand, has no practical moorings and can drift off into irrelevancy. FWIW, I did a minor in philosophy, and while I found it very enlightening, they pretty much admitted it was pointless.