an example of really, really bad college advice
With the uncertain state of today’s economy, college education in general is being put under the microscope, scrutinized for how much value it really adds to a future worker’s resume, and at least one vocal pundit is arguing that college doesn’t even matter on popular blogs and business news sites, irresponsibly telling a whole generation of high school students to take some time off and explore their opportunities instead. And while it could be beneficial to really experience the world before settling down on your career path, most of us don’t have the trust funds to entertain this as a viable option. Still, the question remains. How relevant will the degree you’ll earn be, and how much are companies willing to pay for your skill when you’re done? Will your college teach you what you need to know, or will you end up with a lot of esoteric, theoretical knowledge, and only a passing grasp of the actual practice? Basically, is your college degree really worth what you paid?
This issue didn’t completely miss academics of course, and college administrators are thinking how to justify their programs and make sure students really get what they need out of undergraduate and graduate tracks. Since we’re dealing with academia, progress has been glacial at best, and many problems still remain while potential ideas are still just being circulated. And unfortunately, some of these ideas aren’t exactly what we’d call realistic or sober. In a recent column at the Chronicle of Higher Education, a vague laundry list of things colleges could do better hides this blissfully detached whopper…
What should happen to students at college? They should become more thoughtful and interesting people. But some 64 percent of undergraduate students are enrolled in vocational majors instead of choosing fields like philosophy, literature, or the physical sciences. We’d like to persuade them that supposedly impractical studies are a wiser use of college and ultimately a better investment. The undergraduate years are [a time] that will never come again, a time to liberate the imagination and stretch one’s intellect without worrying about a possible payoff.
Hmm, let me see. Why are 64% of undergrad students enrolled in vocational majors? Could it possibly have something to do with the fact that they’ll need to pay off tens of thousands in student loans and actually get an in-demand, stable job to feed themselves after they’re done? With all due respect to the authors of this piece, Andrew Hacker and Claudia Dreifus, how many wanted ads for philosophers or literary critics have they seen on Monster.com or LinkedIn lately? I can tell you there are plenty of listings for nurses, programmers, medical technicians, teachers who work with special needs children and engineers, and that’s why instead of reading what Nietzsche had to say on religion or what Plato thought of Greek politics in his Socratic dialogues, those undergrads are cramming for math tests and biology finals. The U.S. needs STEM disciplines very badly and the aging Baby Boomers are ensuring that the healthcare industry will need to keep hiring for the next several decades. Likewise, there will almost always be some room for economists and business majors.
Another important thing to consider is what those who sign paychecks actually need. STEM grads are growing so few and far between, the military wants to invest a whole lot of money into promoting math, science and engineering to future college students. Note how they aren’t in such a big rush to fund philosophers. That’s because computer scientists, physicists, chemists, and engineers can come up with an idea and turn it into a real product while a humanities grad probably won’t even know where to begin. The same applies to the vast majority of employers. They need doers and thinkers when they require that job applicants have a bachelor’s degree or better, not just one or the other. So while its true that a young college freshman just out of school is going to have a rare and limited opportunity for total intellectual freedom, that freedom could come at a major cost and taking a “eh, worry about it later, after you’re done” attitude espoused by Hacker and Dreifus is a very good way to end up in your early twenties, in serious debt, and facing virtually zero job prospects while those who embraced scientific and vocational majors are interning and at least going to interviews.
Colleges need to do a better job of funding future scientists, offer more and better job placement services for their graduates, and create tough courses that give students a thorough understanding of the subject matter, as well as hands on experience out in the field. That’s how they can make education pay off in the short term, not by sacrificing research institutions and encouraging students to get intellectually stimulating, but useless majors which won’t allow them to provide for themselves and saddle them with toxic, impossible to discharge debts, as Hacker and Dreifus advocate. If you’re really interested in philosophy, there are hundreds of tomes, manuscripts and resources for you to explore on your own time. You don’t need to pay several hundred bucks per credit hour to be told to read them and write a paper on what you thought. What you need is a career.
“If you’re really interested in philosophy, there are hundreds of tomes, manuscripts and resources for you to explore on your own time. ”
Well to be frank, there used to be… But most of it was written by people long dead who had, over the years, less and less to say about the current human condition. New philosophers became rarer and rarer, seeing as no one was studying the subject in college because they were told what a big waste of time it was.
Oh, and all the TV shows sucked because it turns out business majors made shitty directors and producers. But the special effects were awesome.
And “Free time” WTF is that?
Snark ended…
My advice: Get a useful STEM degree when you’re young. When your career is established and your kids are leaving the nest, go back to school and study what interests you. You’d be surprised how absorbent the 40-ish brain still is. And by how rewarding education for its own sake can be.
Unfortunately, at 40 all sorts of other things tend to occupy one’s mind: career, your first divorce and subsequent remarriage, that sort of thing. Few fourtiers I know manage to gather the energy to start doing what they really wanted. Best bet is to wait until your pension, which in my country already is at 67, and rising.
The problem with picking the right education goes beyond the choice between the humanities on one side and science/engineering on the other. Even within the ‘hard’ sciences, students will find themselves forced, jobwise, into the applied sciences and engineering sector, whereas fundamental research seems to be underrated. That may become a threat to scientific progress in the longer run.
phi-loso-phy n. 1. the study of the principles underlying conduct, thought, and the nature of the universe 2. the general principles or laws of a field of knowledge 3. a particular system of ethics 4. composure, calmness I find it hard to believe you can get a degree in philosophy. What do you study? Other peoples observations and conclusions? To form your own based on how they relate to the noted philosophers? Maybe I’m simple, but, one can form conclusions by simply observing what goes on around you. Does having a PhD in philosophy make everyone around you respect what you say? See that guy over there? 3 beers and he starts acting like an idiot. Under the above definition , that makes me a philosopher. See where I’m going with this? Don’t get me wrong. I’m not not making light of the subject. Just trying to make sense of it. Buddha was a philosopher, as was Vishnu. Sun Tzu, the philosophy of war. Yes, we need philosophers for the “modern” era. What will or can they tell us. Science is good? Most of us, hopefully, know that. It may be that “we know everything already” mentality, that causes a lot of people to turn away from philosophy. That, and the fact that it’s harder every day to cover our basic needs because of corporate “philosophy”. Our mission statement: to screw you as hard and as often as possible. Now that’s a great “philosophy”. Yes, yes, I know, that’s an inappropriate use of the term, but that’s what it’s come down to.Your college dollars are best spent on anything but fine arts. Or an MBA. you either know how to run a business or you don’t. Learning how to take advantage of people, in the name of business, is NOT the same as running a business. The MBA is a philosophy we could do without. Michael Milken. Remember him? Bernie Madoff, his modern day equivalent. MBAs. I have a lifelong friend who has a fine arts degree. He has 2 jobs. I guess it helps him collect student loans and sell consumer electronics. Thankfully, he’s paid off his student loans, so he won’t have to collect from himself. Physics. Biology. Archeology. Engineering. This is what we need. Along with physical medicine. Let medical science catch up to technology before designing the next generation diagnostic machine. And if you’re a thinker, and only if, then get a degree in philosophy. I hope you have a spouse with a good day job, and a high tolerance for your rantings. Unfortunately, I don’t. Philosophy definition from Webster’s New World Dictionary c1996
Badbass9, what on earth are you talking about?
The way you toss the word ‘philosophy’ around is strongly reminiscent of the way a woo-meister would use ‘quantum’. You seem to have an extremely vague sense of the meaning of the word, and one almost senses, from your rant, that you seem to be proud of the fact.
Society needs philosophy. Oh yes it does. Look at it this way: it takes time for the results of fundamental physics research to trickle down to the everday, practical, applied level of human knowledge. We can agree on that, I think. It may take decades.
The results of philosophy take even longer. The best example from the previous century is probably logic. Without the endeavours in the field of formal logic of Frege, Russel, Wittgenstein et al, we wouldn’t be having this discussion today. There wouldn’t be any computers, see.
As a matter of fact, most of what we call ‘science’ today would not have existed if the outcome of philosophical debates in the 13th century had been different. Really truly. No experimental method, no ideal of observable evidence, no Ockhams razor, no nothing. The islamic world, in many ways superior to medieval Europe, had roughly the same debates with a different outcome.
They’ve lagged behind in science and technology ever since.
We, as a society, need philosophy.
On an individual level, it won’t pay the rent, though. It’s doomed to be a gentlemanly pursuit.
That, or the costs of a college education have to come down drastically.
Hey, Tyrone. How about quantum philosophy? Did you not notice the quotation marks, and my own admission that I was using the term inappropriately? How many times have we sat in a company meeting to hear “our company’s philosophy is……”? This is where we’ve come. In this culture, philosophy has become a word used to impress or to lend creedence to an idea. Not the act of pondering the mysteries of man and the universe. My question was how one could be taught to do this. I believe it to be a natural instinct. A talent if you will. It could be sharpened by education, but, the underlying interest needs to be there. That’s why I compared it to an MBA. You must understand the core principles of business to master administrating one. We need philosophers. Desperately. To question and understand why man has taken the course we have. Alas, philosophy, like scientific research, is not highly valued. You could hear the howls many blocks away if I walked into any corporate office with a PhD in Philosophy on my resume’ and stated my talent was to guide the company’s corporate “philosophy”. Again, yes, we need philosophy. If for no other reason than to question the status quo. In my previous comment I used the term in reflection of today’s common usage. I do have a grasp of what philosophy is and it’s purpose. Believe or not, after the first couple of sentences, I agree completely with your comments. It took the thinkers with their ideas and questions to shape our common society. Today the problem is who will listen. After all, we know everything already. (you do get that as a swipe at today’s elitist mindset) Woo-meister, indeed.
Badbass9,
My issue was mostly with the ‘What do you study/simply observing what goes on around you’ part of your comment. How does that not sound disdainful of philosophy as an academic discipline?
It’s like saying that you don’t have to study math because everone has fingers on which to count.
But I’m glad we agree on the main points.
The problem of ‘who will listen’ is hardly today’s problem, though.
Aristophanes, the first great comedian, was a contemporary of Socrates, the first great philosopher.
See if you can guess how that worked out.
What we need are good meteorologists. JUST ONE good meteorologist would be enough, because his/her views would self-propagate, being correct.