SOME THOUGHTS BY
GARY RAY BRANSCOME
It is written,
"Ask for the old paths, where is the good way, and walk therein, and ye
shall find rest for your souls." (Jeremiah 6:16
Near the beginning of the last century (about 1914)
a radical change took place in American education, as most universities
replaced the classical curriculum (which had been the basis of education for
centuries) with the so-called modern or scientific curriculum. Since that
change took place our universities have, to a great extent, changed from
respected halls of learning into ideological indoctrination centers; and
institutions that once stood for moral, spiritual, and academic excellence have
become hotbeds of spiritual and moral degeneracy. In fact, the morality (or
lack of it) now dominant in our universities is the morality that was formerly
associated with the most poorly educated members of society (tobacco row).
What needs to be understood is that real education
involves much more than just training people to do a high paying job. It
requires a disciplining of the mind that enables a man to lift his thoughts
above the ideologies and passions of the hour. To that end, the classical
curriculum required students to learn the classical languages, and by so doing,
helped them to better understand the English language, and thus to think in
clearly defined concepts. In fact, without that mastery of language modern
scholars are severely handicapped. For example, very few college graduates now
understand the difference between a republic and a democracy, yet the words
“republic” and “democracy” are entirely different in
their origin, and their meaning is as different as the governments of
In addition to helping the student think more
clearly, the classical curriculum enabled the student to expand his thinking
beyond the thought forms popular in his own era. Through familiarity with the
great thinkers of the past, he was able to lift his mind above ideology in
order to see things from another perspective. As a result, those who received a
classical education were not easily swayed by every wind of ideological
doctrine. Instead, they were able to view popular trends and opinions in their
historical perspective, and to know where various ideas originated, what their
consequences were, and how they reappeared from time to time with slight
alterations. At the same time, the Word of God provided them with a standard
for evaluating those ideas.
For example: In Plato's account of the death of
Socrates we find that Socrates believed that our sense of right and wrong had
its origin in civil law, rather than in the law God inscribed upon the heart
(Romans 2:14). In other words, instead of seeing the moral law as basic to the
political law he saw the political law as basic to morality. And, that view is
known as “statism”. However, while it is
true that the political law is often needed to reinforce and support the moral
law, those who assume that our ideas of right and wrong come from the political
law, wind up thinking that they can change morality (and, thus, human nature)
by changing the political law.
The science of economics originated with Adam
Smith’s book “The Wealth of
Nations.” However, while many of the observations noted in that book are
still valid, one assumption that was later rejected is the idea that the value
of a product is determined by the amount of labor it takes to produce it.
Although that view may seem reasonable on the surface, is does not explain many
things, such as why iron and gold, which require a similar amount of labor to
produce, are so different in price. That is why economists now believe that
value is subjective, and is conditioned by supply and demand. Nevertheless,
some of the early economists (who had accepted Adam Smith’s theory) wrongly
assumed that rent, interest, and even profit was unjust because it added no
labor to the product yet demanded greater value.
The concept of evolution occurred to naturalistic
philosophers long before Charles Darwin was born. Darwin simply took their
philosophy and interpreted certain facts of nature to support it, while
offering “survival of the fittest” as an explanation of why it took
place. However, even though he led his readers to believe that the theory was
supported by observable data, it was not. For example, no one has ever observed
one kind of animal changing into another kind, and there is genetic evidence
that such a change is impossible. For that reason,
Communism brought together the mistaken doctrines
that I have just mentioned, and forged them into a secular religion. That religion denies the existence of God (and therefore of
morality), while assuming that profit is immoral, and that human nature can be
changed by the state (statism). On the basis
of those beliefs, that religion then proposed to alter human nature in a way
that would make everyone willing share the fruit of their labor with others. It
proposed to accomplish that goal by first establishing a dictatorship that
would change morality (and thus human nature) by requiring people to live
according to communist ideals. However, even though history has shown the world
what a dismal failure communism actually is, it had to cause untold suffering
and the death of millions of people, before the pseudo-scholars that dominate
our universities would admit that it does not work, and some still will not
admit it.
I know of one woman who views herself as intellectual, pluralistic, and tolerant.
Yet, she worked long and hard to pass legislation aimed at forcing her feminist
views on everyone else. Moreover, upon learning that the congregation I
attended held to the traditional roles of men and women, she urged the women to
rebel. Her university training had obviously not brought her to the point where
she could appreciate or tolerate opinions that were not in accord with her own
way of thinking.
In his book “The Closing of the American Mind”,
Allen Bloom laments the almost tyrannical narrow mindedness common on many
university campuses. Sadly, government support for modern education tends to
institutionalize that narrow mindedness. Moreover, because many highly
influential (but narrow minded) graduates are working to impose their feminist views
on us by force, my daughters may have to leave the country if the government
ever tries to draft them and send them into combat. So far, true patriots have
held off feminist attempts to subvert freedom, however, the feminists have no
intention of giving women a choice when it comes to combat. And, I see no real
hope for change until this nation returns to God and to a classical curriculum
taught in accord with God's Word.
Throughout history there have been certain people
who view themselves as superior to others, and imagine that all of the problems
of society would disappear if everyone would simply think like them. Moreover,
time after time these people have wormed their way into positions of power and
influence, and then used their position to tyrannize others. That is where a knowledge of the classics, including a knowledge of
history and of how these people have worked in the past, would be useful in
preventing tyranny, including the kind of tyranny now being promoted by the
universities.