Any college student here?

[Warik]

Well, Warik, you construct a powerful argument for trade schools and other forms of career education. The tradition of a liberal arts education is not for everyone, particulary those whose main interest is preparing for a career. Indeed, the majority of Americans still don't pursue higher education at all.

I just feel that the idea of college is not what it should be. One goes through 12 years of "rounding" himself with a variety of maths, sciences, and arts throughout elementary and high school. Should college not be the education AFTER one's education that helps him specialize in a particular profession? College seems to want to make somebody a "jack of all trades," and as it works in most RPGS, a "jack of all trades" is good at everything - but is not as good in ANYTHING as someone who specializes.

Don't you think we'd have better scientists, techs, teachers, etc... if they only focused on what was important to their career? Why are scientists being taught art? Why are techs being taught English? Why are English teachers being taught math?

But, as I said, the purpose of the liberal arts is not just to teach the plot summary of Moby Dick or the philosophical foundations of democracy but to learn to experiment with different ways of thinking and perspectives. This has never been "necessary." People who travel broadly usually end up being much more tolerant of different perspectives and the same thing happens when you absorb yourself in the amazing variety of philosophical discourses.

The funny part about this is that I've found myself becoming more tolerant of different perspectives and people after watching 5 of the 7 seasons of Star Trek: The Next Generation than I did in high school English. If you hunt through the deep recesses of EF and look for some old debates between RyanH and myself, you'll find that I was quite the ruthless elitist. College attempts to FORCE change by subjecting people to liberal arts who do not want to be there. Learning CANNOT be forced effectively, and I don't think anyone would argue that.

Many people do feel that a foundation in the arts and philosophy is valuable in itself.

Eek... I had that argument about intrinsic value in philosophy class... one of the other reasons I hated that class.

Teacher: "Knowledge is intrinsically good."

Me: "No it's not. It's only good to people because they can use it to better themselves and reason."

Teacher: "No... even if there weren't people, knowledge will still be good."

Me: "Why?"

Teacher: "Because it's intrinsically good."

Duhrr.

To them, "culture" is as important as anything else and, indeed, entire revolutions have been grounded in the reformation of culture as well as political and economic structures.

And I will not dispute that or belittle it. If "culture" and a profound knowledge of the arts is of great importance to someone, then so be it - but please do not subject me to it. I do not like to read fiction - I like reading non-fiction and watching fiction on TV. I have no respect for abstract art - I like looking at realistic depictions of real things. My school receives a fixed amount of money per semester and I expect to receive instruction that will help me become the best computer programmer I can be - English and philosophy are definitely not subsets of said instruction.

-Warik

 

[musclebrains]

This argument is waged constantly in one form or another at schools everywhere. Another variety is that students should not be forced to write standardized English -- that Ebonics and Spanglish are acceptable -- if they dont' want to. And of course it operates on the other side: Humanities students claim they shouldn't have to take science and math classes. "Why should I, a poet, know anything about the ozone layer or quantum mechanics?"

I don't really think the world will be improved by living in a culture of specialists. The core curriculum is quite basic at most schools and post-graduate education allows people to specialize further, according to ability. You may be unusual. Many undergrads have no idea what they want to major in and part of the core curriculum's intention is to expose them to a variety of subjects. I suspect, though, that more students do have an idea of what they want to do than they did in the dark ages of my own undergrad years, partly because people feel so pressured to be productive.

The pragmatist point of view -- that something lacks value if it isn't quantitatively useful -- isn't provable from my perspective. Einstein, like Descartes and Freud, spoke of the value of the literary imagination. The aesthetic response simply isn't quantifiable in the same empirical terms that technology is, and you would have great difficulty finding anyone who has made a "meaningful" impact on society who doesn't also hold the inspirational quality of the educated imagination in high esteem.

 

[CAGED whiteman]

To answer the original question, I go to college. And most of my professors do not seem to be liberal, but I am a business major. A couple of my classes outside the business college did have some more politically correct content, but that's about all.

Those damn journalists are a different story, however.

i think you are right...my major is criminal justice so you would think that some of my professors would be conservative but most are tree huggers...i am just sick of them trying to justify everyones criminal behavior.

 

[athlete21m]

never really paid that much attention and looked in it to it the way u do . I was a business major as well and got away from those stupid ass philosphy classes although i went through a few. Those profs were always some weird fucks. I just handled myshit and got out with a degree, who gives a shit about the profs and their views.