MY grand (great?) nephew, Michael, was recently graduated from a big university. He did exceptionally well, academically, having passed with high honors. His major was biochemistry. These days most “experts” are worried about the lack of STEM students. In case you are not familiar with the term it means: Science (a hard one!); Technology; Engineering; Math. These experts are worried that not enough college students seek degrees in these majors. One reason why is that these subjects require learning objective facts, and subjective opinions are of no value. I consider my nephew’s major of biochemistry to be a part of real science.
Curious as to how scientific a personality he had developed I asked him about his favorite course. I vaguely expected some micro biological course. I forget the “technical” title, but his choice was “wine selection.” This course involves picking the right wine for the right circumstance. In other words, it is what James Bond does so easily. This is a real course, numbered in the catalogue in the 400’s, and is given for credit. I was mildly shocked (if one can be mildly shocked). Michael defended his choice.
Before I repeat his position, let me generalize. What is the core purpose of a university? These days I judge that most people would say “job training.” In order to avoid being too materialistic, they might use ecumenisms, such as “to prepare students to take their place in the world.” The university did this; my nephew is now employed in the quality control department of Pepsi-Cola. This is about as capitalistic and worldly as one can get (unless one works for Coca-Cola). So, once this required minimum job training is inflicted on the student, why should he not have some enjoyment? Maybe he could learn something that can actually improve the quality of his life, for the rest of his life. It is a radical idea, but I offer it as at least a possibility.
Let me digress for a moment and elevate wine associating. In order to understand various wines, Michael had to learn about their origins. For example---and this is not a joke---to associate an Australian wine with a smelly French cheese, he had to know facts dealing with where the grapes grew. That is, he needed to know the nature of the location, the soil composition, etc. In other words, he learned both geology and geography. And these are sciences! STEM appears as more than the part of the glass that we hold when we sip Champagne.
While I contemplated his choice, Michael added more. Wine is an acceptable pleasure. Is it not a general rule that what we are physically and ethically permitted to do we should do correctly? If knowing the acid content of a German wine makes one a happier human, what is the problem? Again, what is the purpose of a university? Is it (only?) to force students temporarily to memorize complex chains of hydro-carbons, until the next exam? Universities already offer many activities (theater performances, sporting events, dances, etc), designed (1) for enjoyment and (2) to help students develop proper social skills. Learning how to choose one wine over another meets these goals as well.
Some traditionalist might object that extracurricular social activities are different from courses that yield credits. This is true, but the only difference is one of the degree of official endorsement given. Giving credit for things like ballroom dancing (and the school does---and Michael took that too!) simply more strongly encourages the student. Is there anyone who really wants a university to avoid giving the student any preparation for being happier as he matures and enters the real world?
What all this comes down to is this comparison between metaphorical characters, namely James Bond and Albert Einstein. James Bond always knew the right wine to go with the right girl. She unfortunately soon would then be murdered by the villain. But she had a nice final drink, and witty conversation. I admit that Bond’s expert knowledge apparently never helped him save the world. However maybe---in a way unknown to the rest of us---it did. For this we all should be grateful. There is no record of Albert Einstein knowing anything about the soil composition of Australia. And his discoveries led to the atomic bomb, and the risk of evil men destroying the Earth. Then there would be no more wine to associate. I think that I have made my point. Let us share a modest Rhineland Chablis from 1997, a moderately good year. It goes well with a Big Mac.
P.S. If James Bond is so skilled then I would think that he could do a better job concealing his identity. Everyone knows in advance that he is a secret agent.
Comments