Assertin' and Rationalizin'

This is mainly a response to our class discussion on Tuesday, especially pertaining to Nyssa's point about substantiating our reasoning for liking or disliking Adams' book.

That really struck a chord with me, because I feel like it's a habit we should all get into if only because it'll keep us from wasting our time on arguments that people don't take seriously.

Anyway, in terms of The Education of Henry Adams, here is how I feel (read on for the rationale): 

The assertion: I think that Adams leaves the term "education" largely undefined because he wants us to delve further into what it means on a personal level; he wants the reader to question the textbook, Webster-style meaning and further ponder whether that traditional standard has ever really served us with useful knowledge. Adams experiences a plethora of opportunities to learn from books-- studying at Harvard, teaching at Harvard, etc.-- but somehow this doesn't satisfy him or, according to Adams, provide him with skills he can use in everyday interactions. 

The (book-based) justification: Looking at the numerous opportunities Adams has to define his view of education point-blank, he has to have a reason for failing to do so. Why would an author do that? One choice that seems evident to me is the aforementioned reason (that he wants us to figure out our own notions of the concept first). Also, Adams' choice to include chapters that deal primarily with what society considers education (versus less traditional definitions, like "life experience") shows that these specific, traditional experiences are NOT what he considers practical and/or useful. All his studying doesn't amount to his satisfaction or, in his eyes, success, so he's definitely pointing to the fact that we need to realign our societal definition.

I hope this makes sense, and that the justification section isn't just a repeat of my assertions.

Au revoir.