PAstrychef wrote:Tyndmyr wrote:cphite wrote:But even if we look at the more stereotypical categories like literature, philosophy, language, history... these things are all extremely important to society.
I would disagree with that. Let's say every college scrapped every philosophy class, and ceased to offer it after the current lot graduated. What would you expect the net effect to be?
Compare vs, say, chemistry.
You think that , ha ha ha, nothing noticeable would happen. But you're wrong. There would be a slow failure of civilization.
Eventually, a society that failed to contemplate itself and its place in the universe, that ran on a set of rigid rules, if it ran at all.
Nah. We're not extracting the idea of introspection forcibly from people's brains. Just removing a degree path, and with it, a lot of formalized training. Books, etc would still exist.
Removing formalized training for chemistry vs philosophy, which would impact society more drastically and rapidly?
The idea that a) a college degree is a kind of superior job-training exercise and b) therefore any studies that don't (semi) automatically bring a good chance of making a higher salary are silly is infuriating. (By that metric, you should all be trying to be football or basketball players. Those guys attend one or two years of college and then get to make millions playing a game)
They're not inherently bad. I just think there's a number of people who are set up with expectations of at least reasonable career options, who are very disappointed upon graduation. I don't object to the choice being available, merely that the advertising of the choice is accurate.
If you are fully aware that this degree will not improve your financial state, and wish to pursue it anyway, cheers.
It also doesn't follow that you should try to be a football or basketball player. The chances of getting a good salary from that are NOT high.
Zamfir wrote:I don't see the dichotomy between enlightening yourself as a human being, and doing applied work with directly clear uses. (Doogly and cphite are hinting at a similar divide). It's not like heavy industry is devoid of creativity, or the complexities of modern life, or people unlike oneself.
It won't be everyone's path to being a good person, but I am skeptical that other fields do so much better. Be it Norse poetry, or humanist sciences. There's beauty in well-designed machinery, and human tragedy as well.
This. Being useful or financially successful does not inherently make you a worse person, or an uncreative person. The apparent idea that choices must somehow be balanced like this is...just odd.
Some of the most fulfilling things I've created or helped to make* have also been the most useful/financially successful.