In traditional education, the most practical skills learned are typically reading, writing, and mathematics. These foundational skills are undeniably useful, though there is ongoing debate about whether the specific math taught is practical enough. Should the focus be on personal finance or statistics, for example? Regardless, literacy and numeracy are essential, practical components of education.
However, justifications for other subjects, such as the sciences and humanities, often move away from the economic benefits and instead focus on civic or character development. As a result, we see a clear distinction where the three Rs provide direct vocational benefits, while the liberal arts are viewed more as a path to personal edification. Beyond these subjects, students often acquire practical vocational knowledge through specialized schools or on-the-job training.
The Ancient Divide: Liberal Arts vs. Vocational Training
The distinction between moral-practical education and liberal arts has ancient roots. Aristotle believed that vocational education, which focused on practical utility, could corrupt one’s character and was unsuitable for a free person. Historically, vocational training has often been separated from general education, which was primarily aimed at cultivating good citizenship and virtue.
These divisions persist today, where some criticize education for not providing enough economic value and call for a more practical, vocationally-oriented system. Others defend the humanistic value of education, arguing that schools should focus on non-economic benefits like personal growth and character development. This debate extends from K-12 education all the way through higher education.
A Third Way: Reconnecting Work with Character
There is, however, a third way to approach this issue, one that begins by recognizing something is amiss with the way the moral/practical divide plays out in the lives of students once they enter adulthood.
It is increasingly common for people to feel disconnected from the concept of work. This is not a Marxist critique about the ownership of labor, but an observation that work has become a source of bitterness rather than dignity for many. A small subset of people find meaning and purpose in their work, while others struggle to “find their passion”—which may be part of the problem—or resent work altogether.
Work as a Characterological Issue
It is not widely recognized that a person’s relationship to work is a characterological matter. This disconnect between work and personal fulfillment is a deep issue, one that could be addressed by shaping how we view work from a young age.
Maria Montessori: A Pedagogue for the Working World
One of the best educators to address this issue was Maria Montessori, who famously stated, “All work is noble; the only ignoble thing is to live without working.” She emphasized that all forms of work, whether manual or intellectual, hold inherent dignity and value. Montessori’s philosophy was not limited to white-collar or “creative class” work, but extended to all professions, including manual labor.
Imbuing Work with Moral Value
Education should aim to empower individuals to see value in all kinds of work—whether in masonry, engineering, the arts, sciences, social work, or banking. Every profession can be viewed as a station in the broader human project of shaping the world for our benefit. Work, in all its forms, should be a source of pride, a way to engage in the collective effort to combat entropy, and a moral endeavor that enhances the dignity of both the worker and society.