Vive-ut-Vivas comments on Open Thread June 2010, Part 3 - Less Wrong

6 Post author: Kevin 14 June 2010 06:14AM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (606)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: Vive-ut-Vivas 15 June 2010 07:40:50PM 6 points [-]

The inertia of the conventional wisdom ("you've gotta go to college!") is further making the new generation slow to adapt to the reality, not to mention another example of Goodhart's Law.

I wish I could vote this comment up a hundred times. This insane push toward college without much thought about the quality of the education is extremely harmful. People are more focused on slips of paper that signal status versus the actual ability to do things. Not only that, but people are spending tens of thousands of dollars for degrees that are, let's be honest, mostly worthless. Liberal arts and humanities majors are told that their skill set lies in the ability to "think critically"; this is a necessary but not sufficient skill for success in the modern world. (Aside from the fact that their ability to actually "think critically" is dubious in the first place.) In reality, the entire point is networking, but there has to be a more efficient way of doing this that isn't crippling an entire generation with personal debt.

Comment author: wedrifid 18 June 2010 11:53:05AM *  4 points [-]

I wish I could vote this comment up a hundred times.

I would settle for just 10 times if it were in the form of a post. ;)

Liberal arts and humanities majors are told that their skill set lies in the ability to "think critically";

Evidently the ability to think critically is instilled after the propaganda is spread.

Comment author: SilasBarta 17 June 2010 07:09:00PM 5 points [-]

Liberal arts and humanities majors are told that their skill set lies in the ability to "think critically"; this is a necessary but not sufficient skill for success in the modern world.

Wow, now that is what I would call fraud. It's something the students should be able to detect right off the bat, given the lack of liberal arts success stories they can point to. It's like they just think, "I like history, so I'll study that", with no consideration of how they'll earn a living in four years (or seven). That can't last.

In reality, the entire point is networking, but there has to be a more efficient way of doing this that isn't crippling an entire generation with personal debt.

And I wish I could vote that up a hundred times. I wouldn't mind as much if colleges were more open about "hey, the whole point of being here is networking", but I guess that's something no one can talk about in polite company.

Comment author: realitygrill 17 June 2010 04:37:01AM 2 points [-]

Tell my parents this one.

On the other hand, is 'success' an existentialist concept (in that you have to define it yourself)? I would think it'd be near impossible to come to a consensus as to what is necessary and sufficient for success.

Comment author: Mass_Driver 17 June 2010 05:13:52AM 5 points [-]

Sure, it's vague. The point is that, for any plausible, conventional definition of success you might be able to come up with, a typical liberal arts degree is definitely insufficient and probably unnecessary to meet that definition's criteria.