Why the us should cut useless courses from college degrees.

[Salandriagado]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberal_arts_education

"Its central academic disciplines include physics, biology, philosophy, logic, linguistics, literature, history, political science, psychology, and mathematics..."

"For much" =/= all

lrn2english

It does equal "most", though. So which 6 or more of the things in that list are you saying don't make useful contributions?

[United Muscovite Nations]

Would you also support getting rid of history?

History can actually be verified lol

The vast majority of it can't lol

Moreover, it's absolutely not a scientific field.

[Saranidia]

Don't @ me ever again. You're the reason we can't have nice things. I bet you think Fleischman's is good vodka.

for tax reasons cheap American spirits don't go north of the border.

Cheap spirits should not be legal.

[SD_Film Artists]

makes you think maybe some people just resent being confronted with any sort of learning related to oppression, huh

I think I would resent that, as it smells of bias and revisionism. History is history regardless of whether they were oppressed or not.

[Workers Juche Liberation Front of Korea]

Yeah, I'd rather have someone who at least knows enough chemistry not to use water on a greasefire...

And can put out fires without spreading oxygen and generally understands how fires spread.
I think high school diploma/GED/Baccalaureate/5 GCSEs should be required plus firefighter training.

College should not be required in my opinion since it’s a very practical, manual skill like being a good carpenter, electrician or plumber.

Being a police officer requires high social and psychological skills, criminological knowledge and more legal knowledge than most people have(but less than lawyers).
Therefore i think it should require a Police Academy Bachelors’ degree.

Really..?

[Liriena]

makes you think maybe some people just resent being confronted with any sort of learning related to oppression, huh

I think I would resent that, as it smells of bias and revisionism. History is history regardless of whether they were oppressed or not.

You know, sometimes "revisionism" is good, because the historical consensus can be wrong or misguided. Hindsight is a hell of a tool and we shouldn't just forever rely blindly on what some of our forebearers wrote about themselves because they got their stories out first.

Also, all history is "biased" because every source was written by a human being with specific conditions, determinations and limitations.

[Liriena]

History can actually be verified lol

The vast majority of it can't lol

Moreover, it's absolutely not a scientific field.

Yeah. Good historians will do their due diligence with what they've got, but there is not scientific theory or method to it.

[Saranidia]

And can put out fires without spreading oxygen and generally understands how fires spread.
I think high school diploma/GED/Baccalaureate/5 GCSEs should be required plus firefighter training.

College should not be required in my opinion since it’s a very practical, manual skill like being a good carpenter, electrician or plumber.

Being a police officer requires high social and psychological skills, criminological knowledge and more legal knowledge than most people have(but less than lawyers).
Therefore i think it should require a Police Academy Bachelors’ degree.

Really..?

what’s surprising about that
Social and psychological skills: talking people out of violence or suicide. Interviewing suspects.

Criminological skills: investigating crimes, reasoning with criminals to “come quietly”

Legal knowledge: in the UK when arresting someone you need to tell them which Act of Parliament made what they are doing illegal.

[SD_Film Artists]

I think I would resent that, as it smells of bias and revisionism. History is history regardless of whether they were oppressed or not.

You know, sometimes "revisionism" is good, because the historical consensus can be wrong or misguided. Hindsight is a hell of a tool and we shouldn't just forever rely blindly on what some of our forebearers wrote about themselves because they got their stories out first.

Also, all history is "biased" because every source was written by a human being with specific conditions, determinations and limitations.

There's a difference between 'this previously held fact has, after credible research, been found to be false' and 'This person/nation 300 years ago doesn't conform to my personal politics, so let's ignore all of their contributions to humanity and paint them as a 2-dimentional villain'.

[Liriena]

You know, sometimes "revisionism" is good, because the historical consensus can be wrong or misguided. Hindsight is a hell of a tool and we shouldn't just forever rely blindly on what some of our forebearers wrote about themselves because they got their stories out first.

Also, all history is "biased" because every source was written by a human being with specific conditions, determinations and limitations.

There's a difference between 'this previously held fact has, after credible research, been found to be false' and 'This person/nation 300 years ago doesn't conform to my personal politics, so let's ignore all of their contributions to humanity and paint them as a cartoon villain'.

Ok who are you mad about?

[SD_Film Artists]

There's a difference between 'this previously held fact has, after credible research, been found to be false' and 'This person/nation 300 years ago doesn't conform to my personal politics, so let's ignore all of their contributions to humanity and paint them as a cartoon villain'.

Ok who are you mad about?

Historical revisionists, and hypocrites.

[Liriena]

Ok who are you mad about?

Historical revisionists, and hypocrites.

Ok, so imaginary people doing a bad thing. Gotchu.

Also, chances are that, if you are this defensive about a long dead dude, it's because he conforms to your own personal politics.

[SD_Film Artists]

Historical revisionists, and hypocrites.

Ok, so imaginary people doing a bad thing. Gotchu.

You're saying that historical revisionists don't exist?

Also, chances are that, if you are this defensive about a long dead dude, it's because he conforms to your own personal politics.

I just dislike political interference in history and academic dishonesty. If I was only defending the hypothetical dude because he conforms with my own politics then I'd be scarcely better than the revisionists.

[The Republic of Fore]

I've met doctors who had undergraduate degrees in the arts and lawyers who studied philosophy, classics, or sociology. I've met successful entrepreneuers who specialize in graphic design and have done quite well for themselves. I don't think the people asserting that the arts are useless understand education or the current labor market.

They don't, and are arguing from a position of that lack of understanding and education.

I've twice said that my liberal arts education allowed me to shift gears and move from one career to two others with little problem and been asked "How are we supposed to change our major halfway through it?"

I never had to change my major, because my education was broad enough to fit into many different fields. Did I specialize at all? Of course. But my broad base of knowledge gives me an advantage in being able to get into many different careers/disciplines.

Specializing too much can lead to a situation where you are unemployable if there are too many $degree majors in a narrow field out there, or if your skills are obsolete before you even graduated. I mean when I was in college in the late 80s/early 90s they were phasing out PUNCH CARDS in the computer classes -- while I had a 386 PC on my desk at home.

As far as I know punch cards went the way of the dodo in business in the mid 70s at the latest.

People are gung ho about free college now. That's probably why other people are all up in arms about useless degrees.

1) They are not useless
2) Why? They can study what they want with their free college program.

I didn't choose to, I was forced. And even then, no it isn't. There's no law that says what happens to you is my problem. I don't care about an imaginary social contract.

So you're asking the rest of us to walk past you if you're bleeding out in the street, and not to call for an ambulance, the police, or even ask you if you need help. Because it's not our problem and you don't care about an imaginary social contract.

Why don't you try working on the reading comprehension you're so happy to lecture me about? I've never once said no one should have it. If you bothered to read my posts you could see that I've repeatedly said THEY SHOULD BE OPTIONAL! Is that too difficult of a concept for people here? Classes don't have to be effing mandatory to exist! Jesus Christ people. Stop. Forcing. Students. To. Study. Useless. Crap. There's no reason that any school good or not should require classes that a student doesn't need. If you want to study classes you don't need, then choose them yourself! Or, make them mandatory for relevant majors. Wow, what a concept.

Perhaps you should not go to school at all since you don't seem to comprehend that mandatory courses are there because the college you go to has deemed them necessary for an education.

I comprehend you just fine. You're just insisting on something that's ridiculous, that could be solved by researching and going to a school that offers the ridiculously narrow focus you want rather than wailing about how it's not fair that the schools you want to go to/went to required a core curriculum.


Or make your own school.

Or go to one that reflects your philosophy.

Really, your argument is "I want to see an Avengers movie! But I don't want to see the Hulk or Hawkeye. They should be cut out of the movie, or I should pay less because I don't want them there!"

"I want to buy a car! But I don't intend to use the safety belts or the horn, so they should be removed and I shouldn't have to pay for them!"

"I want to eat Tiramisu! but I can't stand espresso, so make it without it!"

1. Of course you have to jump to the most ridiculous extreme. The chances I'll ever be in that scenario are basically nothing. But no, I wouldn't want someone like you to call me an ambulance. Because it would probably just lead to you turning around and claiming that I used a public service, so I can't complain when half my paycheck gets stolen in taxes.
2. Or just cut useless shit out of degrees. I don't understand the absolute tantrum throwing over this. All your argument boils down to is "I think these things are important so everyone should be forced to waste time on them! And if anyone dares suggest they shouldn't all kick my feet and scream they shouldn't go to school at all!" None of those scenarios are comparable because all of them are optional. I don't watch the avengers. I don't eat tiramisu. And I have no desire to own a car. There is no school in this country that isn't a trade school that doesn't require the studying of some form of useless garbage. Period. Please, name me one university in the US that only requires students to take courses in their major. I already went through this. I studied many courses that were nothing but useless shit. And I learned nothing. So what did I achieve besides wasting my time? And stop saying "just start your own school". That's a childish playground argument. If I had the money for that, I'd be doing much more useful things.

[The Republic of Fore]

I've met doctors who had undergraduate degrees in the arts and lawyers who studied philosophy, classics, or sociology. I've met successful entrepreneuers who specialize in graphic design and have done quite well for themselves. I don't think the people asserting that the arts are useless understand education or the current labor market.

They don't, and are arguing from a position of that lack of understanding and education.

I've twice said that my liberal arts education allowed me to shift gears and move from one career to two others with little problem and been asked "How are we supposed to change our major halfway through it?"

I never had to change my major, because my education was broad enough to fit into many different fields. Did I specialize at all? Of course. But my broad base of knowledge gives me an advantage in being able to get into many different careers/disciplines.

Specializing too much can lead to a situation where you are unemployable if there are too many $degree majors in a narrow field out there, or if your skills are obsolete before you even graduated. I mean when I was in college in the late 80s/early 90s they were phasing out PUNCH CARDS in the computer classes -- while I had a 386 PC on my desk at home.

As far as I know punch cards went the way of the dodo in business in the mid 70s at the latest.

People are gung ho about free college now. That's probably why other people are all up in arms about useless degrees.

1) They are not useless
2) Why? They can study what they want with their free college program.

I didn't choose to, I was forced. And even then, no it isn't. There's no law that says what happens to you is my problem. I don't care about an imaginary social contract.

So you're asking the rest of us to walk past you if you're bleeding out in the street, and not to call for an ambulance, the police, or even ask you if you need help. Because it's not our problem and you don't care about an imaginary social contract.

Why don't you try working on the reading comprehension you're so happy to lecture me about? I've never once said no one should have it. If you bothered to read my posts you could see that I've repeatedly said THEY SHOULD BE OPTIONAL! Is that too difficult of a concept for people here? Classes don't have to be effing mandatory to exist! Jesus Christ people. Stop. Forcing. Students. To. Study. Useless. Crap. There's no reason that any school good or not should require classes that a student doesn't need. If you want to study classes you don't need, then choose them yourself! Or, make them mandatory for relevant majors. Wow, what a concept.

Perhaps you should not go to school at all since you don't seem to comprehend that mandatory courses are there because the college you go to has deemed them necessary for an education.

I comprehend you just fine. You're just insisting on something that's ridiculous, that could be solved by researching and going to a school that offers the ridiculously narrow focus you want rather than wailing about how it's not fair that the schools you want to go to/went to required a core curriculum.


Or make your own school.

Or go to one that reflects your philosophy.

Really, your argument is "I want to see an Avengers movie! But I don't want to see the Hulk or Hawkeye. They should be cut out of the movie, or I should pay less because I don't want them there!"

"I want to buy a car! But I don't intend to use the safety belts or the horn, so they should be removed and I shouldn't have to pay for them!"

"I want to eat Tiramisu! but I can't stand espresso, so make it without it!"

1. Of course you have to jump to the most ridiculous extreme. The chances I'll ever be in that scenario are basically nothing. But no, I wouldn't want someone like you to call me an ambulance. Because it would probably just lead to you turning around and claiming that I used a public service, so I can't complain when half my paycheck gets stolen in taxes.
2. Or just cut useless shit out of degrees. I don't understand the absolute tantrum throwing over this. All your argument boils down to is "I think these things are important so everyone should be forced to waste time on them! And if anyone dares suggest they shouldn't all kick my feet and scream they shouldn't go to school at all!" None of those scenarios are comparable because all of them are optional. I don't watch the avengers. I don't eat tiramisu. And I have no desire to own a car. There is no school in this country that isn't a trade school that doesn't require the studying of some form of useless garbage. Period. Please, name me one university in the US that only requires students to take courses in their major. I already went through this. I studied many courses that were nothing but useless shit. And I learned nothing. So what did I achieve besides wasting my time? And stop saying "just start your own school". That's a childish playground argument. If I had the money for that, I'd be doing much more useful things.

[The Republic of Fore]

Just because you deem well rounded people a good thing doesn't make it so. We would lose nothing by letting people make their own choices of what courses to take. Making people study things they have no interest in just leads to bitterness.

Don't project.

I had no interest in mathematics, but studying them 1) did not kill me and 2) has turned out to be somewhat useful.

Good for them, your friends don't represent every animator. What is with this site and people saying "Hah you're wrong because I pointed out this one in 10 thousand exception!

And you don't represent every student in the world. Congratulations!

And "what it is with this site" is it's a debate site, not an echo chamber. If you can't manage people having different opinions and being able to back them up with evidence when discussing your opinions, then maybe it's not the place for you.

Good for you. It wouldn't have killed you to not study it either. There's this thing called google. Most math problems can be solved with it.

[Liriena]

Ok, so imaginary people doing a bad thing. Gotchu.

You're saying that historical revisionists don't exist?

Unless you are going to bring up specific examples or substantive basis for making a general statement about historical revisionism today, I don't see why I should take your claim of "historical revisionists and hypocrites" seriously.

Also, chances are that, if you are this defensive about a long dead dude, it's because he conforms to your own personal politics.

I just dislike political interference in history

Then you dislike history. All of it. All history is political.

[United Muscovite Nations]

The vast majority of it can't lol

Moreover, it's absolutely not a scientific field.

Yeah. Good historians will do their due diligence with what they've got, but there is not scientific theory or method to it.

I mean, it's just not testable or repeatable. It relies fundamentally on the idea that there may be forms of knowledge that we have access to prior to experience (e.g. knowledge of the possible).

[The World Capitalist Confederation]

There's often a lot of talk about how to improve the education system in the US. Personally, there's one simple idea we can start with. Stop forcing classes on students that have nothing to do with their chosen field of study, or have little real world application like art or humanities. Not only would it save them time and money, but high schools could replace them with more useful subjects, such as teaching students how to file taxes. What say you NSG?

I mean, I understand art and music, but why the humanities? They are a good way to stop historical revisionism, ensure people make informed decisions before voting and often tear racism and anti-semitism apart, as most such assumptions are built on misinformation and ignorance rather than active hate.

[The Black Forrest]

Don't project.

I had no interest in mathematics, but studying them 1) did not kill me and 2) has turned out to be somewhat useful.



And you don't represent every student in the world. Congratulations!

And "what it is with this site" is it's a debate site, not an echo chamber. If you can't manage people having different opinions and being able to back them up with evidence when discussing your opinions, then maybe it's not the place for you.

Good for you. It wouldn't have killed you to not study it either. There's this thing called google. Most math problems can be solved with it.

Ohhhh you just want to be given the answers. I understand. Learning math is hard.

[Jebslund]

Ohhhh you just want to be given the answers. I understand. Learning math is hard.

Those who know nothing can understand nothing. By the same token, those who wish to know nothing can learn nothing. There's no teaching someone who is willfully ignorant.

[SD_Film Artists]

You're saying that historical revisionists don't exist?

Unless you are going to bring up specific examples or substantive basis for making a general statement about historical revisionism today, I don't see why I should take your claim of "historical revisionists and hypocrites" seriously.

I'm "mad" (actually just acadamically unimpressed rather than "mad" as you put it) at historical revisionists and hypocrites. You asked a simple question and you got a simple answer. Can you provide evidence that I'm not acadamically unimpressed at them? Do think that I secretly like them?

I just dislike political interference in history

Then you dislike history. All of it. All history is political.

History contains politics, some of it more than others. Either way a good historian can take an objective viewpoint.

[The World Capitalist Confederation]

Unless you are going to bring up specific examples or substantive basis for making a general statement about historical revisionism today, I don't see why I should take your claim of "historical revisionists and hypocrites" seriously.

I'm "mad" (actually just acadamically unimpressed rather than "mad" as you put it) at historical revisionists and hypocrites. You asked a simple question and you got a simple answer. Can you provide evidence that I'm not acadamically unimpressed at them? Do think that I secretly like them?

Then you dislike history. All of it. All history is political.

History contains politics, some of it more than others. Either way a good historian can take an objective viewpoint.

It's physically impossible to take an objective viewpoint, due to subconscious biases and such.

[The East Marches II]

Just because you deem well rounded people a good thing doesn't make it so. We would lose nothing by letting people make their own choices of what courses to take. Making people study things they have no interest in just leads to bitterness.

Don't project.

I had no interest in mathematics, but studying them 1) did not kill me and 2) has turned out to be somewhat useful.

Society's lack of understanding of mathematics is probably the primary reason that women's privilege in the justice system is not recognized. The statistics just fly right over the heads of people who had no interest in mathematics and did not bother to understand them :^)

[United Muscovite Nations]

There's often a lot of talk about how to improve the education system in the US. Personally, there's one simple idea we can start with. Stop forcing classes on students that have nothing to do with their chosen field of study, or have little real world application like art or humanities. Not only would it save them time and money, but high schools could replace them with more useful subjects, such as teaching students how to file taxes. What say you NSG?

I mean, I understand art and music, but why the humanities? They are a good way to stop historical revisionism, ensure people make informed decisions before voting and often tear racism and anti-semitism apart, as most such assumptions are built on misinformation and ignorance rather than active hate.

Just a quick tidbit, historical revisionism isn't the dirty word a lot of people (on both sides of the political spectrum) use it as. It just means revising history by examining it from a different perspective. It doesn't invalidate perspectives before it, it just introduces a new way of looking at history.