Horizon of knowledge and curricular haste

When Dr Abdus Salam received the Nobel Prize and returned from the cold air of Stockholm carrying the warmth of theoretical triumph, he was reportedly asked a pointed question by a businessman: "Doctor, what impact will your theory have on business?" One imagines the mind that helped unify the fundamental forces of nature pausing for a moment. The conversation had leapt from the elegant unity of the electroweak theory to profit margins and market share. Perhaps he smiled and replied: "For now, it helps us understand the universe. You may calculate the profits later."

This anecdote is more than a witty exchange; it embodies a philosophy. Universities and corporations do not move to the same rhythm. Business seeks quarterly returns; knowledge demands generational patience. Markets chase trends; universities dwell on questions. The construction of knowledge is gradual, built through reflection and not via reaction.

Today, a new urgency echoes across our educational horizon: Artificial Intelligence. It has been announced that in the coming years, a three-credit-hour course on AI will be made mandatory in all undergraduate and postgraduate programmes. The rationale is straightforward: AI is a transformative force of the 21st century, and every student must be conversant with it.

Certainly, AI matters. But does importance automatically imply compulsion? And do serious educational reforms emerge from impassioned announcements?

If the goal is to introduce students to the mathematical and scientific foundations of AI, then three credit hours amount to little more than an orientation. The true language of machine learning is linear algebra, probability theory, statistics and optimisation. These are not topics mastered in a single semester; they require years of disciplined engagement.

If, instead, the aim is to teach students how to use AI tools, another question arises: which tools? Today's software may become obsolete tomorrow. Will the curriculum be rewritten annually? Will universities begin issuing degrees in "prompt engineering", tied to fleeting platforms?

Academic discussions, especially under HEC guidelines, focus not on whether AI is important but on how it should be integrated. Faculty emphasise that ethical concerns require rigorous interdisciplinary treatment, not superficial additions. Past experience with mandated courses shows that without depth, such initiatives risk becoming symbolic rather than transformative.

More troubling still is the quiet erosion of foundational disciplines. Science graduates sometimes emerge without robust mathematical training. Under the label of "quantitative reasoning", we offer diluted mixtures of algebra, logic and statistics. When foundations weaken, modernity becomes cosmetic.

Leading global universities offer numerous AI courses, yet rarely as blanket requirements. They are electives shaped by faculty expertise, institutional deliberation and long-term vision, not imposed under the pressure of momentary enthusiasm. Serious curriculum design grows from sustained academic discourse, not from administrative impulse.

The role of the university is not to sprint behind every technological wave but to discern which waves are transient and which are civilisational. Serious education does not operate on reflex; it rests on analysis.

Dr Abdus Salam did not pursue electroweak unification because it was fashionable. He pursued it because it was fundamental. Only later did those theoretical insights ripple into technological domains. Principles preceded applications. We would do well to remember that sequence.

If students possess strong mathematical grounding, clarity of logic, disciplined writing and ethical awareness, they will be capable of mastering any emerging technology whether AI or a field yet unnamed. Enduring intellectual habits outlast transient tools. Reform is necessary, but reform anchored in seriousness. Otherwise, we risk producing graduates conversant with yesterday's software yet deprived of the courage to ask enduring questions.

If asked what serious education contributes to business, we might gently reply that profits can wait; first, let us protect and strengthen society.