IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/jknowl/v4y2013i1p6-23.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Hector Hypothesis: Disciplines, Difficulty, and Democracy

Author

Listed:
  • Susan Bruce

Abstract

Through an interrogation of the nature and value of encounters with “difficulty” in Humanities Higher Education, this essay aims to articulate some of the ways in which Humanities education itself, even in its least canonical and least prestigious manifestations, is of value. Beginning with a brief reading of a scene from Shakespeare’s Troilus and Cressida, which models for readers unfamiliar with Humanities scholarship the kinds of questions a Humanities perspective on a text might raise, the essay argues that distinctions established in that play regarding conceptions of the nature of value underlie debates in literary studies over what should be studied, and why. It goes on to claim that an analogous distinction underlies approaches to the question of “difficulty” in Humanities education, and it then places this discussion in the context of an examination of a real moment from a real university seminar in which a student expresses frustration with the material he is studying. Chosen because it concerns disagreement prompted by texts which are neither canonical nor, on the face of it, difficult, this moment is used to exemplify a fundamental value of Humanities education, which offers a space wherein can be pursued and practiced an argumentational method whose fostering is fundamental to the health of liberal democracy. Copyright Springer Science+Business Media New York 2013

Suggested Citation

  • Susan Bruce, 2013. "The Hector Hypothesis: Disciplines, Difficulty, and Democracy," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 4(1), pages 6-23, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:jknowl:v:4:y:2013:i:1:p:6-23
    DOI: 10.1007/s13132-012-0125-4
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1007/s13132-012-0125-4
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s13132-012-0125-4?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:jknowl:v:4:y:2013:i:1:p:6-23. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.