The Liberal Arts: Do they Matter?

[United Marxist Nations]

The invisible hand of the market tends to be a bit of an asshole as far as effects on society go. People being poor throughout their lives because they were educated in something that corporations would prefer they didn't in is not a solution to a problem, it is a problem.

Or... perhaps you could go learn something "the corporations" want you to and live a happy life of middle class member, don't you think?

The thing is, most people don't want to do that. And a lot of people just plain can't. For example, I can't be an engineer, accountant, or really anything related to higher math, for a living. What I am good at is history, which is why I plan on being a history teacher and eventually professor. Anything else I would hate. If you enjoy doing something that they want, then good for you. As I said, it is being forced, against your will, to bend your education to the whims of another.

[Aggicificicerous]

Are you sure you didn't mix those two up? There's no way that second design is modern.

In most places including China this would be modern.

This following page explains it.
https://www.flickr.com/photos/adamcnelson/523442582/

Yeah, that one is modern. The second one, even if it is contemporary, is based off a much older design.

[Scomagia]

The invisible hand of the market tends to be a bit of an asshole as far as effects on society go. People being poor throughout their lives because they were educated in something that corporations would prefer they didn't in is not a solution to a problem, it is a problem.

Or... perhaps you could go learn something "the corporations" want you to and live a happy life of middle class member, don't you think?

Doing something you hate everyday doesn't sounds like happiness, to me.

[Willamette Valley]

Yes. There's a lot more to life than money and the job prospects of liberal arts majors are better than they get made out to be.

[Wanderjar]

As a soon-to-be liberal arts student, I sure do fuckin hope they do, otherwise everything I genuinely love in life doesn't much matter.

I have Bachelor's in history from the University of South Florida. A Master of Letters in History from the University of Glasgow, and a Master of Arts in Politics and Internatonal Relations of the Middle East. I speak French, Arabic, and a little Chinese. I played rugby at every university, I have published several articles and presented at over a dozen academic conferences. I have two Master's theses online in digital format and have already been cited twice.

Best job I could get?

Private First Class in the Marine Corps. Infantry.

My best friend has a Bachelor's of Arts in Psychology from University of New Haven, as well as a Masters degree in the same from there. He has a Ph.D in Sociology from University of Kansas. He's published at least six articles in Psych journals, much more difficult to do than in say, history,and presented at far more conferences than I, so many I've forgotten. Best job he could get? Private First Class in the Army. Military Police.

Most recent ex-girlfriend has a Bachelor's in Finance from Stetson University. She has a Masters in the same from Clemson. She has an MBA from I believe Yale. Best job she could get? Seaman 3rd Class, US Navy. Logistics and Operations. No-one else would hire her.

It's a tough world right now buddy.

[Pope Joan]

Being able to talk about a question of "does something matter?" is purely a job for the liberal arts. Science, math and technology are unfit for such a discussion.

[Greed and Death]

When people say we have too many college grads they mean liberal arts majors, and when people say we need more college grads for the future job market they mean STEM and technical school. Yes I understand the liberal arts "teach you how to think" and many employers like liberal arts degree holders. The problem is those employers are looking for Ivy League liberal arts majors, the vast majority of liberal arts majors work as baristas where their new found ability to think only shows them how miserable they are.

What we need to do is make it more difficult to qualify for financial aid for liberal arts majors and use the saved money to support STEM and technical schools. This will encourage more of the degrees and skills we need and less of the ones we do not.

[Greed and Death]

As a soon-to-be liberal arts student, I sure do fuckin hope they do, otherwise everything I genuinely love in life doesn't much matter.

I have Bachelor's in history from the University of South Florida. A Master of Letters in History from the University of Glasgow, and a Master of Arts in Politics and Internatonal Relations of the Middle East. I speak French, Arabic, and a little Chinese. I played rugby at every university, I have published several articles and presented at over a dozen academic conferences. I have two Master's theses online in digital format and have already been cited twice.

Best job I could get?

Private First Class in the Marine Corps. Infantry.

My best friend has a Bachelor's of Arts in Psychology from University of New Haven, as well as a Masters degree in the same from there. He has a Ph.D in Sociology from University of Kansas. He's published at least six articles in Psych journals, much more difficult to do than in say, history,and presented at far more conferences than I, so many I've forgotten. Best job he could get? Private First Class in the Army. Military Police.

Most recent ex-girlfriend has a Bachelor's in Finance from Stetson University. She has a Masters in the same from Clemson. She has an MBA from I believe Yale. Best job she could get? Seaman 3rd Class, US Navy. Logistics and Operations. No-one else would hire her.

It's a tough world right now buddy.

Well you could have gotten in to OCS but for the military budget cuts.

[Pope Joan]

The modern education industry wants to turn out human widgets, which will then get retooled over and over or else scrapped. Human capital, cogs in the machine.

Liberal arts encourage critical thinking. Society mistrusts free thinkers.

[Highfort]

They matter. Should people make them a primary degree choice? Probably not, unless you're going to take up secondary skills so you can work outside of your field. Or, if education is your thing, pursue post-grad and get a tenured position.

I'm a computer science major minoring in philosophy. Computer science will make me money; philosophy will stop me from wanting to kill myself after spending days staring at code.

[Highfort]

The modern education industry wants to turn out human widgets, which will then get retooled over and over or else scrapped. Human capital, cogs in the machine.

Liberal arts encourage critical thinking. Society mistrusts free thinkers.

You act like engineers and scientists can't critically think. Obviously they possess the skill to some degree or they'd be incapable of problem-solving.

Some of the most critical-thinking people I know are in STEM because the problems in computer science and biology interest them, not just because it makes money. The money IS good, though.

[Pope Joan]

They matter. Should people make them a primary degree choice? Probably not, unless you're going to take up secondary skills so you can work outside of your field. Or, if education is your thing, pursue post-grad and get a tenured position.

I'm a computer science major minoring in philosophy. Computer science will make me money; philosophy will stop me from wanting to kill myself after spending days staring at code.

Law school like Philosophy and English majors, because they can create a reasoned argument. Many top executives are/were Philosophy majors.

[Highfort]

They matter. Should people make them a primary degree choice? Probably not, unless you're going to take up secondary skills so you can work outside of your field. Or, if education is your thing, pursue post-grad and get a tenured position.

I'm a computer science major minoring in philosophy. Computer science will make me money; philosophy will stop me from wanting to kill myself after spending days staring at code.

Law school like Philosophy and English majors, because they can create a reasoned argument. Many top executives are/were Philosophy majors.

Computer science seems to favor philosophy as a minor. Many of my courses in philosophy double as logic courses in CS. Apparently knowing how logic works is kind of essential for telling a computer what to do...

[Pope Joan]

The modern education industry wants to turn out human widgets, which will then get retooled over and over or else scrapped. Human capital, cogs in the machine.

Liberal arts encourage critical thinking. Society mistrusts free thinkers.

You act like engineers and scientists can't critically think. Obviously they possess the skill to some degree or they'd be incapable of problem-solving.

Some of the most critical-thinking people I know are in STEM because the problems in computer science and biology interest them, not just because it makes money. The money IS good, though.

That depends on the problem. Some problems are not suited for STEM.

[Skappola]

Underneath these categories, Zakaria includes analysis, persuasion, critical thinking, and problem solving.

Nearly every degree gives you analysis, critical thinking, and problem solving skills. To even get into most good universities, you have to have these very well developed as a prerequisite. I fail to see how liberal arts degrees are special here.

Regarding persuasian, I'll give you that, but some of the best degrees for developing persuasian skills are in business, notably marketing.

[Highfort]

That depends on the problem. Some problems are not suited for STEM.

That's true, but then again STEM never purports to be the end-all problem-solver. STEM solves physical, material problems. If your concern is spiritual, theological, teleological, or ethical then obviously liberal arts is a better fit for you.

Fortunately/unfortunately, depending on how you see it, physical and material problems pay well for solutions where the others do not. The church handles the spirit and theology. Teleological issues are warred over by STEM and church, and ethical dilemmas are considered, for the most part, solved by the common man. Liberal arts has a pretty small window here.

[Pandeeria]

Are we defining Liberal Arts as more of a learning in poetry, music, and art or more into philosophy, morality, and psychology?

[Highfort]

Are we defining Liberal Arts as more of a learning in poetry, music, and art or more into philosophy, morality, and psychology?

All - with the exception of some branches of psychology which are scientific/STEM in nature (such as evolutionary, behavioral, and clinical psychology) - of those would be considered liberal arts since they are non-STEM and non-business/law.

[Pandeeria]

Are we defining Liberal Arts as more of a learning in poetry, music, and art or more into philosophy, morality, and psychology?

All - with the exception of some branches of psychology which are scientific/STEM in nature (such as evolutionary, behavioral, and clinical psychology) - of those would be considered liberal arts since they are non-STEM and non-business/law.

That's a little vague.

Things like art, music, and poetry don't matter. While things like psychology, morality, science, philosophy, are all extremely important.

[Highfort]

All - with the exception of some branches of psychology which are scientific/STEM in nature (such as evolutionary, behavioral, and clinical psychology) - of those would be considered liberal arts since they are non-STEM and non-business/law.

That's a little vague.

Things like art, music, and poetry don't matter. While things like psychology, morality, science, philosophy, are all extremely important.

How can you be so bold as to say that the former - which enrich life and are, for many, a major part of life - don't matter and yet the latter somehow do? According to faith, morality is already determined. We have no need for moralists except our theologians. So by that barometer, moral studies are no longer relevant. Psychology is derided by some as bogus and a non-science, so there too we see detractors who claim it's unimportant.

I would argue that my own minor, philosophy, is seen as one of the most pretentious and unnecessary fields of all time. Philosophy is rarely empirical - unless you study the empiricists, of course - it's not designed to be experimental, and it doesn't even have a well set-out goal. Some philosophers are moralists and life-style promoters, others explore the limits of knowledge, and yet others merely chart how philosophical trends are growing and waning in society. Would any of those be candidates for "not mattering"? Sure, by some barometers of measurement.

Your dismissal of the arts is appalling, frankly.

[Wanderjar]

I have Bachelor's in history from the University of South Florida. A Master of Letters in History from the University of Glasgow, and a Master of Arts in Politics and Internatonal Relations of the Middle East. I speak French, Arabic, and a little Chinese. I played rugby at every university, I have published several articles and presented at over a dozen academic conferences. I have two Master's theses online in digital format and have already been cited twice.

Best job I could get?

Private First Class in the Marine Corps. Infantry.

My best friend has a Bachelor's of Arts in Psychology from University of New Haven, as well as a Masters degree in the same from there. He has a Ph.D in Sociology from University of Kansas. He's published at least six articles in Psych journals, much more difficult to do than in say, history,and presented at far more conferences than I, so many I've forgotten. Best job he could get? Private First Class in the Army. Military Police.

Most recent ex-girlfriend has a Bachelor's in Finance from Stetson University. She has a Masters in the same from Clemson. She has an MBA from I believe Yale. Best job she could get? Seaman 3rd Class, US Navy. Logistics and Operations. No-one else would hire her.

It's a tough world right now buddy.

Well you could have gotten in to OCS but for the military budget cuts.

Basically yeah. They now won't even talk to you without a science degree.

[Pandeeria]

That's a little vague.

Things like art, music, and poetry don't matter. While things like psychology, morality, science, philosophy, are all extremely important.

How can you be so bold as to say that the former - which enrich life and are, for many, a major part of life - don't matter and yet the latter somehow do? According to faith, morality is already determined. We have no need for moralists except our theologians. So by that barometer, moral studies are no longer relevant. Psychology is derided by some as bogus and a non-science, so there too we see detractors who claim it's unimportant.

I would argue that my own minor, philosophy, is seen as one of the most pretentious and unnecessary fields of all time. Philosophy is rarely empirical - unless you study the empiricists, of course - it's not designed to be experimental, and it doesn't even have a well set-out goal. Some philosophers are moralists and life-style promoters, others explore the limits of knowledge, and yet others merely chart how philosophical trends are growing and waning in society. Would any of those be candidates for "not mattering"? Sure, by some barometers of measurement.

Your dismissal of the arts is appalling, frankly.

Art? The modernized abstract trash we see today that doesn't mean anything? It's just random assortment of colors? Yes, modern day abstract art is shit. Most of it's not creative, it doesn't have a good, if any message or tone, it's terrible.

More historical art is a lot more impressive, taking lots of skill to do. However, it's still just art. It's nice to enjoy in your free time, but it's simply doodlings and well-practiced painting and whatnot compared to something like philosophy and questioning even the most basic fundamentals of life. Science and Psycology on the other hand are actually learning about practical, concrete subjects that can actually better humanity in an actual way.

[Wanderjar]

A success story I know of from the arts, is a buddy who studied music theory and psychology (Double Major) at Denison. He didn't get a job straight out of college, nope. He did however do more unpaid volunteer/internships at music festivals than can be counted. He now works for Live Nation making 300 dollars a day. Three weeks on, one week off. Dude is doing pretty great. Another buddy of mine majored in history and by stroke of good fortune managed to land a job with an HR firm doing recruiting. He does pretty well, making a respectable 55k. The latter friend's best asset is astounding good looks (bodybuilder) and a great personality. He's one of the funniest, most kind hearted people I've ever known and he was able to translate that well into interviews and score a pretty decent job. You *can* do well in the liberal arts, you just have to play your cards right.

[Highfort]

Art? The modernized abstract trash we see today that doesn't mean anything? It's just random assortment of colors? Yes, modern day abstract art is shit. Most of it's not creative, it doesn't have a good, if any message or tone, it's terrible.

More historical art is a lot more impressive, taking lots of skill to do. However, it's still just art. It's nice to enjoy in your free time, but it's simply doodlings and well-practiced painting and whatnot compared to something like philosophy and questioning even the most basic fundamentals of life. Science and Psycology on the other hand are actually learning about practical, concrete subjects that can actually better humanity in an actual way.

Interesting how you dismiss modern abstract "trash" without actually taking time to appreciate what the artist may be trying to convey. I'm sure the same attitude was had by individuals who criticized Dali for not having a coherent subject matter or Picasso for not drawing standard Renaissance-style anatomy for his figures.

If one perhaps does not see creativity in a work that an artist has labored over, one may consider that it's just as likely that the author is terrible as it is that one is too ignorant or too stubborn to comprehend the message of the author.

You caricature art as "doodling" and yet praise philosophy which, when it comes down to it, is traveling around, talking to people, and thinking about questions you're incapable of answering. Oh wait, that's also a caricature of a subject that's far more nuanced than I just portrayed, just as your portrayal of art does not capture it's nuance.

Art stirs the emotions, helps humans see different perspectives and, in my mind, is something we should nurture alongside problem-solving subjects like the sciences.

The sciences are part of STEM and psychology is rife with pseudoscientific babble, although it's getting better every day.

[Pandeeria]

Art? The modernized abstract trash we see today that doesn't mean anything? It's just random assortment of colors? Yes, modern day abstract art is shit. Most of it's not creative, it doesn't have a good, if any message or tone, it's terrible.

More historical art is a lot more impressive, taking lots of skill to do. However, it's still just art. It's nice to enjoy in your free time, but it's simply doodlings and well-practiced painting and whatnot compared to something like philosophy and questioning even the most basic fundamentals of life. Science and Psycology on the other hand are actually learning about practical, concrete subjects that can actually better humanity in an actual way.

Interesting how you dismiss modern abstract "trash" without actually taking time to appreciate what the artist may be trying to convey. I'm sure the same attitude was had by individuals who criticizes Dali for not having a coherent subject matter or Picasso for not drawing standard Renaissance-style anatomy for his figures.

If one perhaps does not see creativity in a work that an artist has labored over, one may consider that it's just as likely that the author is terrible as it is that one is too ignorant or too stubborn to comprehend the message of the author.

You caricature art as "doodling" and yet praise philosophy which, when it comes down to it, is traveling around, talking to people, and thinking about questions you're incapable of answering. Oh wait, that's also a caricature of a subject that's far more nuanced than I just portrayed, just as your portrayal of art does not capture it's nuance.

Art stirs the emotions, helps humans see different perspectives and, in my mind, is something we should nurture alongside problem-solving subjects like the sciences.

The sciences are part of STEM and psychology is rife with pseudoscientific babble, although it's getting better every day.

When I went to google images and typed in "Art": https://www.google.com/search?q=abstract+art&safe=off&espv=2&biw=1920&bih=979&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ei=wTxMVYaZCsXUoATn_oCwCw&ved=0CAYQ_AUoAQ#safe=off&tbm=isch&q=Art
Same goes for Abstract Paintings: https://www.google.com/search?q=abstract+art&safe=off&espv=2&biw=1920&bih=979&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ei=wTxMVYaZCsXUoATn_oCwCw&ved=0CAYQ_AUoAQ#safe=off&tbm=isch&q=Abstract+painting

I don't feel emotion to it. All I can think is "what the fuck am I looking at right now". At least at the stuff that actually could be considered art.

Like in philosophy, you actually get to ponder on meaningful questions that for all we know will never be answered while in art in you're painting a picture of something. The only form of art I like are those hyper-realistic paintings that seem like photographs. Now I know those are the artists that actually put in time to make something mind-blowing instead of half-baked garbage that others make. Do they prove a point? No. Is it still mind blowing? Definitely.

Art is still a pretty silly thing. If you want to feel emotion, you should probably have a meaningful conversation with someone or actually ponder what is the constructs of humanity, what actually is humanity, etc. (all philosophical things) or just watch something emotional.

Hey, I want to see what you consider good art to.