I was recently consulted in the case of a child who was fully functional and attending school when headaches developed. An intracranial mass was identified. Surgery was performed and a partial resection was obtained of what proved to be a craniopharyngioma. Unfortunately, there was a massive intraoperative hemorrhage followed by 2 postoperative episodes of bacterial meningitis and extensive vasospasm. Now, 5 months postoperatively, magnetic resonance imaging shows extensive hypoxic brain injury, and the child is unresponsive and supported by a feeding tube and breathes through a tracheostomy. The tumor is regrowing. Is it technically possible to irradiate this craniopharyngioma? If so, technically how ought it be done, and with what dose and fractionation scheme? If there is no likelihood that radiation therapy will restore neurologic function, is it ethical to irradiate? The case calls for striking a balance between technical skills and humanistic professionalism. It illustrates one of the longstanding debates of higher education: the relative value of technical training versus a broad and liberal education. On the one hand, we hold forth as an ideal of higher education that learning is of value both for its own sake and to make us better people. On the other hand, higher education is generally expected to provide us with applicable skills that make us capable of earning a living. No one is made more directly capable of designing a bridge, starting an intravenous line, designing a radiation therapy field, or writing software code by virtue of studying Shakespeare’s sonnets, being guided through the history of Alexander the Great’s conquests, or learning