What an interesting thought experiment! I like your curriculum. Can I suggest one or two additions? However radical Marx and Freud have been, they are no longer a “different version” of our civilization. They are ideological mainstays of what would be left behind. So perhaps have some optional courses on topics that throw Western Civ into relief. After all on Mars we’ll be seeing things from a distance. Students might read the Analects alongside Plato, to see how different traditions on earth contrast with each other. They might study the history of bureaucracy in Dickens, because Mars will require new administrations, but the old human problems will haunt those systems too. And we’ll need a course on travel narratives: Hakluyt and Swift, for the new space colonists. To hep them question the whole concept of the syllabus, Azimov’s Foundations might be core reading, along with extracts from Gibbon.
I don’t know what I think of this. I realize that it’s a thought experiment, but still, I’m not sure of the parameters. In particular, I find this statement deeply problematic:
“And yet innovation would be crucial for survival. So Mars U would need to model both intellectual conformity on survival-critical issues and radical freedom to innovate.”
I have trouble making sense of that. How can one institution demand intellectual conformity and radical freedom in the same arena, which in this case is survival-critical issues? I know we’ve got a university system that likes to talk about innovation, but it’s run on systems that bend strongly toward conformity. Innovation does happen, but I’m inclined to think that’s as much in spite of the system as because of it. On the whole, I’m inclined to think that most talk about innovation is romantic in the crude sense that it refuses to recognize the conditions required for innovation.
But let’s put that aside. Just how big is this Mars University going to be? For the sake of making a back-of-the-envelope calculation, let’s say it has a total student population of 100, which, I know, is very small. That’s 25 students per class. Students don’t come from nowhere; they have parents. Let’s assume that couples have only one child (I know, below replacement). That gives us 75 people per class, one student and two parents.
Students don’t go to college upon birth. They need 12 years of primary and secondary education. Again, I assume our current system for the sake of making this thumbnail estimate. Prior to those 12 years of schooling we have 6 years of pre-schooling. That gives us a total of 22 cohorts of 75 people each, two parents and one child.
Multiply that out and we get a colony population of 1650 people. That is, by this crude crude estimate it takes a colony of 1650 people to support a college of 100. I know Musk is thinking of Mars as a possible back-up for earth’s population when earth becomes uninhabitable. That’s a fantasy. 1650 people in a colony? When’s that going to happen? In any event, what kind of faculty are you going to have for 100 students? I looked in the current US News rankings and find that Antioch (in Ohio, near Dave Chappelle) has 117 students. Couldn’t find anything about the faculty, nor at Antioch’s website. But I’d imagine they make use of a lot of part-timers.
Getting back to Mars. If we divide the college population, 100, by the total population, 1650, we find that 6% of the population is in college. So, the USA has a total population 340 million and a college and university student population (including graduate school) of 19 million. That divides out to, you guessed it, 6%. Believe me, I didn’t do that calculation before I did my crude estimate. So I find the agreement between the two as surprising as it is pleasing. That suggests we can scale up my thumbnail calculation rather easily.
So, we now have a college population of 1000 in a colony of 16,500 people. What size of faculty are we going to have. Looking in the US News rankings I see that Hampshire, with 717 students, has a faculty/student ratio of 12/1, which works out to 60 full-time faculty. Oberlin, with 2950 students, has a faculty/student ratio of 9/1, which works out to 328 full-time faculty. That strikes me as beginning to get large enough to think about. That would imply a Mars colony of about 50,000.
[At this point I worry about my assumption of one child per couple. If that’s what we’ve got on Mars, then the only way the colony can grow is by flying more people up there, which I supposed is easily enough done. If you want colony population to be entirely endogenous, then we need more than 2 children per couple. Just how much more....we can play around with that. Later.]
But just what kind of faculty do we really need on Mars? After all, we’ve got advanced AI. Much but certainly not all instruction could take place via AI. I took, say, 40 courses in my four years at Johns Hopkins. But, since I took more than one course from some faculty, I only had 33 teachers. In an AI environment we would cut that back some. How far? To 15, 10, 5?
What’s this do to Mars University? Why not turn over all the conformity to the AI and have the faculty for innovation. But innovation in what? I suppose my general point is that innovation needs to be conceptualized at the level of whole populations. Even in the case where individual names can be associated with particular innovations, those individuals operate in an intellectual ecosystem. What's the ecosystem going to be like on Mars. How many people, doing what, and in conjunction with what AI? Off hand, I'd say we haven't a clue.
On the whole, I’m inclined to think that your “radical freedom to innovate” is a luxury item. Countries with large populations can afford that kind of luxury, which mostly grows in the cracks between all the systems set up to organize things. Mars may need innovation, but how does it get it done? Farm it out to earth-based thinkers?
In any event, if you are willing to stick innovation into the Mars curriculum, you might want to try Johan Huizinga’s 1938 all-but forgotten classic, Homo Ludens. As I’m sure you know, it’s not about innovation. As the title proclaims, it’s about play. That’s where you’ll get innovation, from play.
Now that I think of it, it seems to that your post functions best as a Straussian (in Cowen's usage) critique of the Utah law, rather than as speculation about a possible Martian university curriculum. You pretty much say that in your final two paragraphs. But even there, I'm skeptical about innovation.
All your questions are good ones Bill! The local provocation for my post is the Utah bill I mentioned in the opening paragraph. I am interested in the twin impulses these day, mandating Western Civ and also imagining life on Mars. So that is the conceit. All of your questions are good ones...
On the whole, I favor of some (possibly mandated) work in Western Civ. Just how that would be delivered, another issue. I note further that one of Plato's dialogues has had a direct influence on my life. That dialogue is Crito, which is central to thinking about civil disobedience. I was a conscientious objector to war in Vietnam era and so had to formulate written arguments. Similar arguments have helped me define my relationship to the academy.
But I do wonder about the rest of the world as well. What's World Civ look like and how do we teach it in relation to Western Civ? For example, the Japanese have very different attitudes towards anthropomorphic robots than those in the West. Where do those attitudes come from, Shinto, Buddhism?
Even in plentiful earthly conditions, the cafeteria approach to gen ed is intellectually barren and incoherent, which is also easier to realize once you imagine it on Mars.
What an interesting thought experiment! I like your curriculum. Can I suggest one or two additions? However radical Marx and Freud have been, they are no longer a “different version” of our civilization. They are ideological mainstays of what would be left behind. So perhaps have some optional courses on topics that throw Western Civ into relief. After all on Mars we’ll be seeing things from a distance. Students might read the Analects alongside Plato, to see how different traditions on earth contrast with each other. They might study the history of bureaucracy in Dickens, because Mars will require new administrations, but the old human problems will haunt those systems too. And we’ll need a course on travel narratives: Hakluyt and Swift, for the new space colonists. To hep them question the whole concept of the syllabus, Azimov’s Foundations might be core reading, along with extracts from Gibbon.
Yes! I was thinking about the Analects, which would be excellent on Mars! Will you come join. me there? Bring the family!
we don’t all want to go to space :( my daughter would though! I will have to shuttle between…
It reminds me of Kim Stanley Robinson!
I don’t know what I think of this. I realize that it’s a thought experiment, but still, I’m not sure of the parameters. In particular, I find this statement deeply problematic:
“And yet innovation would be crucial for survival. So Mars U would need to model both intellectual conformity on survival-critical issues and radical freedom to innovate.”
I have trouble making sense of that. How can one institution demand intellectual conformity and radical freedom in the same arena, which in this case is survival-critical issues? I know we’ve got a university system that likes to talk about innovation, but it’s run on systems that bend strongly toward conformity. Innovation does happen, but I’m inclined to think that’s as much in spite of the system as because of it. On the whole, I’m inclined to think that most talk about innovation is romantic in the crude sense that it refuses to recognize the conditions required for innovation.
But let’s put that aside. Just how big is this Mars University going to be? For the sake of making a back-of-the-envelope calculation, let’s say it has a total student population of 100, which, I know, is very small. That’s 25 students per class. Students don’t come from nowhere; they have parents. Let’s assume that couples have only one child (I know, below replacement). That gives us 75 people per class, one student and two parents.
Students don’t go to college upon birth. They need 12 years of primary and secondary education. Again, I assume our current system for the sake of making this thumbnail estimate. Prior to those 12 years of schooling we have 6 years of pre-schooling. That gives us a total of 22 cohorts of 75 people each, two parents and one child.
Multiply that out and we get a colony population of 1650 people. That is, by this crude crude estimate it takes a colony of 1650 people to support a college of 100. I know Musk is thinking of Mars as a possible back-up for earth’s population when earth becomes uninhabitable. That’s a fantasy. 1650 people in a colony? When’s that going to happen? In any event, what kind of faculty are you going to have for 100 students? I looked in the current US News rankings and find that Antioch (in Ohio, near Dave Chappelle) has 117 students. Couldn’t find anything about the faculty, nor at Antioch’s website. But I’d imagine they make use of a lot of part-timers.
Getting back to Mars. If we divide the college population, 100, by the total population, 1650, we find that 6% of the population is in college. So, the USA has a total population 340 million and a college and university student population (including graduate school) of 19 million. That divides out to, you guessed it, 6%. Believe me, I didn’t do that calculation before I did my crude estimate. So I find the agreement between the two as surprising as it is pleasing. That suggests we can scale up my thumbnail calculation rather easily.
So, we now have a college population of 1000 in a colony of 16,500 people. What size of faculty are we going to have. Looking in the US News rankings I see that Hampshire, with 717 students, has a faculty/student ratio of 12/1, which works out to 60 full-time faculty. Oberlin, with 2950 students, has a faculty/student ratio of 9/1, which works out to 328 full-time faculty. That strikes me as beginning to get large enough to think about. That would imply a Mars colony of about 50,000.
[At this point I worry about my assumption of one child per couple. If that’s what we’ve got on Mars, then the only way the colony can grow is by flying more people up there, which I supposed is easily enough done. If you want colony population to be entirely endogenous, then we need more than 2 children per couple. Just how much more....we can play around with that. Later.]
But just what kind of faculty do we really need on Mars? After all, we’ve got advanced AI. Much but certainly not all instruction could take place via AI. I took, say, 40 courses in my four years at Johns Hopkins. But, since I took more than one course from some faculty, I only had 33 teachers. In an AI environment we would cut that back some. How far? To 15, 10, 5?
What’s this do to Mars University? Why not turn over all the conformity to the AI and have the faculty for innovation. But innovation in what? I suppose my general point is that innovation needs to be conceptualized at the level of whole populations. Even in the case where individual names can be associated with particular innovations, those individuals operate in an intellectual ecosystem. What's the ecosystem going to be like on Mars. How many people, doing what, and in conjunction with what AI? Off hand, I'd say we haven't a clue.
On the whole, I’m inclined to think that your “radical freedom to innovate” is a luxury item. Countries with large populations can afford that kind of luxury, which mostly grows in the cracks between all the systems set up to organize things. Mars may need innovation, but how does it get it done? Farm it out to earth-based thinkers?
In any event, if you are willing to stick innovation into the Mars curriculum, you might want to try Johan Huizinga’s 1938 all-but forgotten classic, Homo Ludens. As I’m sure you know, it’s not about innovation. As the title proclaims, it’s about play. That’s where you’ll get innovation, from play.
Now that I think of it, it seems to that your post functions best as a Straussian (in Cowen's usage) critique of the Utah law, rather than as speculation about a possible Martian university curriculum. You pretty much say that in your final two paragraphs. But even there, I'm skeptical about innovation.
You might want to take a look at a blog post where I discuss Homo Ludens with Claude 3.7: https://new-savanna.blogspot.com/2025/03/homo-economicus-sucks-homo-ludens-rocks.html
All your questions are good ones Bill! The local provocation for my post is the Utah bill I mentioned in the opening paragraph. I am interested in the twin impulses these day, mandating Western Civ and also imagining life on Mars. So that is the conceit. All of your questions are good ones...
On the whole, I favor of some (possibly mandated) work in Western Civ. Just how that would be delivered, another issue. I note further that one of Plato's dialogues has had a direct influence on my life. That dialogue is Crito, which is central to thinking about civil disobedience. I was a conscientious objector to war in Vietnam era and so had to formulate written arguments. Similar arguments have helped me define my relationship to the academy.
But I do wonder about the rest of the world as well. What's World Civ look like and how do we teach it in relation to Western Civ? For example, the Japanese have very different attitudes towards anthropomorphic robots than those in the West. Where do those attitudes come from, Shinto, Buddhism?
This is excellent. And a great way to demonstrate that the lawmakers who feel the need to legislate on education know very little about it.
Even in plentiful earthly conditions, the cafeteria approach to gen ed is intellectually barren and incoherent, which is also easier to realize once you imagine it on Mars.
This is a great way of looking at it. Hopefully Elon Musk reads this.
shouldn't you read these before you can vote?