Barzun Flays Report; Cites Four Defects

"Incoherent judgments, philosophic misunderstanding, neglect of history, and practical omissions" are the charges levelled against "General Education in a Free Society" by Jacques Barzun, associate professor of History at Columbia University, in the current issue of "The Atlantic Monthly."

Praising its extensiveness and felicity of expression, Barzun discovers weaknesses in the report of Harvard's "Objectives" committee which "alert opponents of General Education will seize upon" and "which will confuse those eager to follow the call."

"Incoherent Judgment" Cited

In evidence of "incoherent judgment," Barzun says, "Even in describing the proposed curriculum, the report seems to be attending to too many things for a clear grasp of its own meaning.

Barzun criticizes as a "philosophic misunderstanding" the Committee's failure to find a satisfactory place for the natural sciences in the general education curriculum.

By "neglect of history," Barzun means evidence collected at other colleges that Harvard has neglected the mass of which had already adopted some of the general courses and other features proposed in the Committee Report. Barzun considers this the Report's weakest point.

In addition, the Columbia professor criticizes the Committee's omitting discussion of problems of administration and budget, and "at times they under-estimate the obstacles or consider certain things impossible, such as organizing the sciences into one introductory course or subjecting every American undergraduate to an encounter with music and the fine arts."