“The liberal arts are often distinguished from what are called the servile arts. While the word “servile” is a bit loaded in our day, here it simply means an art or practice that aims at getting us something useful. We might substitute the less provocative term “practical” for servile. The liberal arts, however, are pursued because they are good in and of themselves. If the city comes into being for the sake of mere life but has as its end the good life, as Aristotle argues, then we can make a similar distinction regarding these two arts: the practical arts exist for the sake of mere life, and the liberal arts for the good life. We might say that liberal education helps us not to live, but to live well. Story and narrative, what we sometimes call the humanities, are not the whole of the liberal arts, but they do seem to be at the core. Liberal education is like people: valuable even when it is useless.”
Jon D. Schaff, “Nadya Williams and the Good News” (a review of Williams’s book “Mothers, Children, and the Body Politic: Ancient Christianity and the Recovery of Human Dignity”)