An Observation about a Kierkegaardian Observation on Academic Specialization

From time to time, academia and academics are accused of over-specialization, of focusing on questions and research that have no impact in the real world. This critique is not new, even in the 21st century when many think it is a new trend in academia. Søren Kierkegaard, early in adult life during his theological studies, made the same observation at a time when he was more enamored with the natural sciences than the theological sciences: 

Kierkegaard expressed his profound admiration for the natural sciences and all their    practitioners—from those who calculate “the speed of the stars” to those who study “intestinal worms”—but at the same time he was compelled to admit that he thought they often merely stirred up clouds of “particularities” by means of which they might perhaps guarantee themselves “a name in the scholarly literature,” but nothing more. 

—Søren Kierkegaard: A Biography, Joakim Garff, trans. Bruce H. Kirmmse, p. 52

Thus, nothing under the sun is new, and some people have always harbored an uneasiness about academic specialization and arcane research. Nonetheless, an observation is in order, in defense of academic and even arcane research:

It is entirely unclear what problem we should have with research that only ends up in highly specialized academic journals and is read by just a few other specialists. Before making this unfair attack on academic research, we should think about all of the “insignificant” actions we take on a daily basis, including in our work. If an electrician fixes one electrical outlet that only one or two human beings will ever use, is it a waste of time? Assuming that the answer is no, then how is it a waste of time for academic researchers to study the speed of the stars, intestinal worms, or even crypto-systematics?

We can happily concede that Lil Wayne and Ariana Grande reach a much larger audience with their work than an electrician, most scientists, any world-renowned theologian, or pretty much anyone else living today. Does that make their work more significant or worthwhile? Hardly. But working in the humanities, I am accustomed to wildly misplaced priorities and utterly unhelpful metrics in determining what is, in the end, worthwhile.

For anyone who will listen, I will simply point out that we should focus on the general and the specific, the broadly applicable and utilitarian as well as specialized “particularities.” Above all, we must remember, “Whatever your hand finds to do, do it with all your might, for in the realm of the dead, where you are going, there is neither working nor planning nor knowledge nor wisdom” (Ecclesiastes 9:10).