Since the beginning of my higher education, I have noticed the amazing similarities between seemingly opposing subjects.  For instance, I would not have expected literature and math to ever coincide because numbers and letters, in my understanding, were opposites.  By not focusing on the differences between these two subjects, I found their similarities amazing.  Just as language has a syntax, so does math.  I believe that the reason I began to understand that all subjects in learning are related is a result of “discovery learning” principles.  Since my professors were challenging me to think, I was “forced to confront [my] current ideas about the subject, many of which may [have been] misconceptions, and reconcile them with what [I] now observe to be the case” (189).

            When Newman says that his Philosophy consists of a “comprehensive view of truth in all its branches” (175), he is saying that we all try to reach an unattainable goal; we want to find intellectual clarity as it relates to every known subject.  In this way, we discover the “relations of science to science” (175); through the understanding of a particular subject to its counterparts, we come to understand that subject more perfectly.  As learners, we aspire to find out how A relates to B, and we can not fully understand A until we know enough about B.  By “removing barriers to interdisciplinary education” (182), we all find that we know more about each individual subject.

            The English degree plan overwhelmed me as a freshman.  I found myself signing up not for courses, but for grades, because I was being forced to learn about science and history—things I did not intend to study extensively.  But as I took some of these courses, I found that I actually enjoyed the concepts presented to me.  I also did better in most math-related courses than in my English ones.  The reason for this, in my opinion, is the fact that math and science challenged me to succeed.  I was being told that I had to take a course about something I didn’t care to learn, and my way of fighting the system was succeeding.  Through these courses, I learned things that will help me understand anything I read and improve my ability to express myself because I can now see the relation of different subjects.

            The University’s purpose is to prepare my mind to form intellectual thoughts and philosophies.  If one examines the word “university,” it is easy to see its root is the same as the word “universe.”  That, to me, is what college is; it is a universe of knowledge that can be accessed by those willing to take the time and effort to do so.  The word  also brings to mind images of the “universal” which is related to Newman’s concept that enlarging the mind is the result of “viewing many things at once as one whole, of referring them severally to their true place in the universal system, of understanding their respective values, and determining their mutual dependence” (176).  Universal Knowledge (which is sought at a University) stems from one’s ability to form connections between the many differing subjects that make up liberal education.

            From Newman’s teachings, we gain perspective on how college sets an individual up for life by not only providing the skills necessary for contributing to economic society, but also providing the skills necessary for contributing to intellectual society.  This notion is similar to the one Moore was trying to carry out in his “discovery learning” technique; by learning a concept’s context, we learn much more about that concept.  Challenging a student to learn ideas rather than rules is the main concept behind this kind of teaching.  A University is not supposed to tell a student what to think, but rather provide an environment where a student can think.  By providing a thought conducive environment, a student is not simply taught a rule, he/she uncovers a lesson through experience.