Why General Education Still Matters in this Time and Age (A Defense of GE Subjects)

In an era dominated by data analytics, cybersecurity threats, artificial intelligence, and rapid digital transformation, the push to marginalize or eliminate General Education (GE) subjects in higher education is short-sighted — and deeply troubling.

As a Cyber-Data-Tech Lawyer and Sociologist, I engage with the daily realities of technological disruption and legal innovation. I work with the intricacies of data privacy, digital governance, and cyberlaw. But even in this highly technical field, one truth remains constant: technology without context, law without ethics, and innovation without humanity will lead us astray.

General Education subjects — philosophy, literature, ethics, social sciences, history — are not luxuries. They are the bedrock of human-centered technological progress and resilient digital citizenship.

Cybersecurity Isn’t Just Technical — It’s Ethical and Sociological

Cybersecurity today is not only about firewalls and encryption protocols. It is about trust, behavior, culture, power, and ethics. Who defines a “cyber threat”? Who gets surveilled, and why? Why do people click phishing links despite awareness campaigns?

You cannot solve these problems with code alone. You need sociological insight into human behavior, ethical reasoning to weigh privacy against security, and historical understanding of surveillance and control. These capacities are exactly what GE subjects build.

Digital Law Needs Critical Thinkers, Not Just Legal Technicians

In my legal practice, I navigate data privacy compliance, cybersecurity regulations, digital rights, and platform governance. But the most difficult questions I face are not found in statutes — they are found in the tension between law and justice, efficiency and equity, automation and accountability.

GE subjects train students to ask:

• What values should guide data collection and AI deployment?
• How do we protect marginalized voices in online platforms?
• How do we regulate cross-border tech companies without sacrificing sovereignty?

These are normative, philosophical, and political questions — and they require a foundation in critical thinking, ethics, political science, and history. Not everything can (or should) be optimized with code.

The Digital Divide Is Also a Knowledge Divide

The push to remove GE is often framed as a way to streamline education for employability. But in doing so, we risk deepening the digital divide, not only in terms of access to devices, but in terms of access to critical consciousness.

Without GE:

• Data scientists may optimize biased algorithms without questioning their social impact.
• Cyberlawyers may defend platforms without interrogating their role in spreading disinformation.
• Engineers may create tools of control rather than tools of empowerment.

GE empowers students from all backgrounds — especially those historically excluded — to engage with technology not just as users or workers, but as thinking citizens and change agents.

Why the Filipino Context Needs GE More Than Ever

For the Philippines, where we face challenges ranging from digital authoritarianism to disinformation, GE is indispensable. The 1987 Constitution demands education that builds character, critical thinking, and civic responsibility. GE does precisely that.

• Rizal without History?
• Digital Rights without Human Rights?
• Democracy without Dialogue?

Removing GE is not modernization — it’s educational amnesia.

General Education as a Firewall for Democracy

In cybersecurity, we talk about building firewalls to protect systems from malicious attacks. In society, General Education is our intellectual firewall — protecting democracy from disinformation, ethics from erosion, and law from losing its moral compass.

As a Cyber-Data-Tech Lawyer and Sociologist, I stand in defense of GE not out of nostalgia, but out of necessity. The future of work may be technical — but the future of humanity depends on whether we educate citizens who can think, feel, and act with conscience.

Let us not produce graduates who know everything about machines but nothing about people.

Let us not digitize education at the expense of democratizing the mind.

Let us defend General Education — for the future is not just digital, it must be deeply human.