> In the Renaissance, the Italian humanists and their Northern counterparts, despite in many respects continuing the traditions of the Middle Ages, reversed that process. Re-christening the old trivium with a new and more ambitious name: Studia humanitatis, and also increasing its scope, they downplayed logic as opposed to the traditional Latin grammar and rhetoric, and added to them history, Greek, and moral philosophy (ethics), with a new emphasis on poetry as well.
In practice, modern “liberal arts” programs often dispense with logic, math, and empirical science. Again, from your link:
> For example, the core courses for Georgetown University's Doctor of Liberal Studies program cover philosophy, theology, history, art, literature, and the social sciences.
More fundamentally, it’s insufficient to throw in a few courses on math that everyone quickly forgets. Math, science, and logic should be the basic foundation for cultivating children’s world view, not literature, philosophy, or social studies.
For example, consider how kids learn about history. They read stories, mostly focused on individuals. But that’s not the only way to learn history. I took a class at Georgia Tech in the history of science, which looked at the impact on society of various technological advances. History education doesn’t quantify anything. But we have lots of data. What was the GDP per capita of ancient Egypt versus Mesopotamia? What are quantitative indicators we can use to help put those societies into context and compare them with ours? what was the infant mortality rate in India before and after British colonization? What were the demographic trends in Mandate Palestine prior to the creation of Israel?