522 Association of American Colleges Bulletin

him in touch with the thinking discipline par excellence; wrong
with the student or with the curriculum or with the instruction
in Philosophy. (Our data show that of the students enrolled in
Economics, History, Political Science, Philosophy, Psychology
and Sociology, in 25 Southwestern colleges and universities dur-
ing the 1940-1941 session, about twice as many are in Sociology
as are in Philosophy, three times as many in Psychology and
nearly four times as many in each of Economics, History and
Political Science. )

To the complaint that the curriculum is now so crowded that
room is not available for more Philosophy, or perhaps for any at
all, we respectfully answer, and urge, that the importance of those
studies which Philosophy comprises is so great that a well con-
ceived liberal arts curriculum cannot afford to omit them, nor can
it afford to relegate them to a minor place. Some of the typical
curriculum is undoubtedly padding: subject matter so light that
it could profitably be condensed to a fraction of its present ex-
tent; duplicated matter, both within a field and in fields apart;
matter of doubtful worth and fitness for the curriculum of quali-
fied college students. If this slack in the curriculum were taken
up, no longer would Philosophy have to be left out, or be sub-
ordinated, as now, for want of room. .

Our inquiries brought replies from presidents, deans, depart-
ment heads and professors expressing deep indebtedness to Phi-
losophy in their own education, and serious concern as to its
present status in the curriculum. Even so, many of these edu-
cators are either excluding Philosophy from their own students
or restricting it to a very few. State and local superintendents
of education, to whom we also addressed inquiries, were unani-
mous in the opinion that Philosophy is a valuable asset to any
high school teacher and that the lack of it among the teachers at
present is deplorable. Yet we know that very few, if any, of our
teachers’ colleges give training in the subject, and that teachers’
colleges elsewhere, when they do teach Philosophy, seldom engage
persons having proper philosophic preparation to teach it.

We think it appropriate to observe, finally, at a time when
education is more criticized than perhaps ever before, that the
educator’s task is not merely, nor even primarily, to train for a
trade. Even less is it his proper task to put youths indifferently