We’re also known for zooming in further, to analyze a particular costume, say, or a choice of brushstroke, or even just a single word. Sometimes this work leads to illuminating discussions that reveal something about the human condition; other times they become divisive as people wrestle with the meaning of a word, for example.

One of those words is “liberal,” along with the terms “liberal arts” and “liberal education.” Historically, stretching back to ancient Greece, the term “liberal arts” had no political connotation. This form of education generally sought to differentiate broad-based learning from more narrowly focused vocational training. Centuries later, “Christians adopted and adapted the liberal arts … in late antiquity and the medieval era,” notes historian Will Katerberg. In America, the 1828 Report of the Course of Instruction in Yale College, with its emphasis on “mental discipline,” and not any one set of content matter, laid the philosophical foundation for the liberal arts. It subsequently served as the model for countless universities wishing to embrace the practice of free thinking. Today, the liberal arts continue to “involve the development of people who know how to think, learn, be creative, and adapt to change,” notes former university president Richard A. Detweiler.

So, the liberal arts have a long history, spanning civilizations across millennia. Today, at Weber State University, students study foundational liberal arts in the form of history, math, philosophy, writing, public speaking, science, psychology and critical thinking, among others. WSU students enter professions that demand some or all of the knowledge and skills taught in these disciplines, and our society needs a broadly educated population.

Yet, as a concept, the liberal arts seem to be under a microscope these days — some might say under a scalpel. Articles about cutting the liberal arts from public universities appear frequently, both in Utah and nationally. How much of that conversation stems from thinking that “liberal arts” is synonymous with liberal politics as the word seems to suggest?

Though university liberal arts disciplines do not have origins in liberal politics, as I have sketched out above, I doubt that much of the public sees that distinction. It’s the word “liberal” that may be the burr under the saddle. Among the 70% of Utahns who identify as “conservative,” the word “liberal” may be as likely to get folks fidgety as the word “Yankees” is to a Red Sox fan. Imagine if core programs of university study were simply renamed the “conservative arts.” In this polarized climate, would some “liberal” parents and students think taxpayer dollars were subsidizing the creation of graduates with a particular political leaning — even if that wasn’t the case?

Today, in red states, I’m doubtful that any marketing strategy can help the term “liberal arts” distance itself from the political connotations of “liberal” any more than the term “conservative arts” could distance itself from the word “conservative” in blue states.

My point here is that perhaps we need a new name for the liberal arts, controversial as that idea may seem. As professor of education Robert L. Fried notes, the liberal arts “is a revered academic trademark” and the term can be difficult to change. Yet individuals change their names, often reinventing themselves in the process. Businesses change their names to appeal to new generations of customers.

Countries on every continent seek to emulate the unique American model of public education, while individual states seem interested in scrapping it. Could reconsidering the name of this millennia-long liberal arts tradition help public universities preserve the core of an education that is the envy of the world? Of course, a name change needs to be accompanied by reworking core courses so they might help us think with technology, for instance, so we can continue to accomplish the key aims of a liberal arts curriculum in a 21st century context.

There’s lots of work to be done. But in the quest to reform public universities, dislike of one word and its perceived political associations shouldn’t be the reason to throw out the baby with the bathwater.

Hal Crimmel is a Brady Presidential Distinguished Professor of English who served for nine years as chair of the English department at Weber State University. He currently serves as the academic director of concurrent enrollment. This commentary is provided through a partnership with Weber State. The views expressed by the author do not necessarily represent the institutional values or positions of the university.