Why the us should cut useless courses from college degrees.

[Galloism]

Arts and humanities are useful to help people learn how to express themselves in writing, which is rather important in life, even if you intend on having a career in a STEM field. Critical analysis of cultural works can also help students develop critical thinking skills which are sorely lacking in the general population.

If you're going to cut anything, you should cut business classes. Those are fuck all useless.

If the goal is critical thinking, I'm not sure we as a society want the places bringing about kangaroo courts for men teaching that sort of thing. They themselves are clearly incapable of it.

Sadly this is the case.

There’s also plenty of gender discrimination, up to and including schools expelling victims of rape and sexual assault based on their gender. Even going so far as asserting that rape against male students doesn’t matter because they could just leave or would have liked it anyway.

Unironically.

[Fahran]

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.

Not usually, no, but there are social judgements and consequences that occur when you elect to behave in a manner that disregards other people. We're not so much bound by our consent as we are by a string of relationships stretching back generations, by cultural conventions and traditions that are our inheritance, and by presumed obligations and rights that comprise a mundane brand of inescapable accountancy. If ever someone should venture to say "we live in a society", my response is "and you're welcome." You owe all that you are to society. And it expects you to give back to some degree.

[Katganistan]

Liberal sciences do exist.
And it's useless, uninformative, and theoretical.

"Gender is theoretical" is a new take I haven't seen.

Yes. It's almost like the folks arguing about what college should be don't actually know what college is.

History can actually be verified lol

Some of it? Sure.

Just remember that it's written by the victors and thus, biased.

[Katganistan]

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.

Yes, well, I'm fine with actually knowing things and not having to look them up and whine about how unfair it is that colleges have requirements.

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.

Art and music are, funny enough, connected to mathematics.

Arts and humanities are useful to help people learn how to express themselves in writing, which is rather important in life, even if you intend on having a career in a STEM field. Critical analysis of cultural works can also help students develop critical thinking skills which are sorely lacking in the general population.

If you're going to cut anything, you should cut business classes. Those are fuck all useless.

As far as I can tell, business classes produce nothing but particularly pretentious managers at retail stores.

On the other hand, they must deal with the Wild Karen on a regular basis.

[Katganistan]

Yes. It's almost like the folks arguing about what college should be don't actually know what college is.

Yes, someone who's been in college for years like myself doesn't know what it is.

That's a really compelling point.

Well, your arguments certainly don't reflect it.

[Kowani]

Yes, someone who's been in college for years like myself doesn't know what it is.

That's a really compelling point.

Well, your arguments certainly don't reflect it.

Kat is secretly fucking savage.

[Katganistan]

Well, your arguments certainly don't reflect it.

You misrepresenting them doesn't really help.

Then again, it seems like most of what you're here for is stroke your own ego as opposed to debating so I'll leave it at that.

No, I'm sorry - that seems to be your shtick.

[Saiwania]

How can people in countries with free college ever possibly understand the real cost of it, and how damaging it is in the countries where its not free at the point of access? Yet ever more opportunities are continually denied or made harder for those who can't or don't want to spend years at some university learning Liberal propaganda because of ruinous globalism in too many places.

I'm not even convinced that the prices a lot of colleges charge are even real. Its like the Healthcare industry where they just charge as high as they want because they can.

If the government paid for all tuition, what is stopping colleges from just increasing prices anyways on top of whatever subsidies they get?

Part of the problem as I see it, is that the US government is in the business of guaranteeing student loans to begin with, when if some of it was allowed to default or not be paid for, colleges would have to actually vet people more, in regards to if they'll be able to pay the tuition after graduation and whether they'll do well in the course of learning or not.

[Kubra]

How can people in countries with free college ever possibly understand the real cost of it, and how damaging it is in the countries where its not free at the point of access? Yet ever more opportunities are continually denied or made harder for those who can't or don't want to spend years at some university learning Liberal propaganda because of ruinous globalism in too many places.

I'm not even convinced that the prices a lot of colleges charge are even real. Its like the Healthcare industry where they just charge as high as they want because they can.

If the government paid for all tuition, what is stopping colleges from just increasing prices anyways on top of whatever subsidies they get?

Part of the problem as I see it, is that the US government is in the business of guaranteeing student loans to begin with, when if some of it was allowed to default or not be paid for, colleges would have to actually vet people more, in regards to if they'll be able to pay the tuition after graduation and whether they'll do well in the course of learning or not.

cuz in them places where college is generally free (at public institutions) da gubmint don't pay tuition, they simply set a schools budget and let em get to it. The big difference is competitiveness, you gotta study harder to get in because grades are the only guarantor of admission.

[Immoren]

"Gender is theoretical" is a new take I haven't seen.

Yes. It's almost like the folks arguing about what college should be don't actually know what college is.

Some of it? Sure.

Just remember that it's written by the victors and thus, biased.

I should change my name to Victor so I could write history.

[The Black Forrest]

Yes. It's almost like the folks arguing about what college should be don't actually know what college is.

Just remember that it's written by the victors and thus, biased.

I should change my name to Victor so I could write history.

Hmmmm? Dangerous. What if many people hate an incident. They might look for Victor.

[Liriena]

As far as I can tell, business classes produce nothing but particularly pretentious managers at retail stores.

Words of a Communist.

That's the best you've got?

It's current year, m'dude. "Communist" is not the ultimate insult anymore.

[The of Korea]

That's the best you've got?

It's current year, m'dude. "Communist" is not the ultimate insult anymore.

True. That honor would have to fall to "libertarian socialist".

how is that an insult?

[Workers Juche Liberation Front of Korea]

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.

Care to explain?

[The Archregimancy]

I'm an archaeologist.

I focused on such 'useless' topics as archaeology, history, and anthropology when I was an undergraduate. I went on to earn two further degrees - an MA and a DPhil - now focusing exclusively on archaeology.

I now travel the world - I've worked on every permanently inhabited continent across a 30-year career - and earn a six-figure salary (whether you count in USD, GBP, or euros).

It's only personal anecdote, of course, and my personal example extrapolates to precisely nothing; but all of those humanities and social sciences courses don't seem to have done me any harm.

[Liriena]

how is that an insult?

It's arguably even stupider than milquetoast communism.

Good burn brah. Consider me absolutely roasted like a piggy.

[Post War America]

I'm an archaeologist.

I focused on such 'useless' topics as archaeology, history, and anthropology when I was an undergraduate. I went on to earn two further degrees - an MA and a DPhil - now focusing exclusively on archaeology.

I now travel the world - I've worked on every permanently inhabited continent across a 30-year career - and earn a six-figure salary (whether you count in USD, GBP, or euros).

It's only personal anecdote, of course, and my personal example extrapolates to precisely nothing; but all of those humanities and social sciences courses don't seem to have done me any harm.

I have another anecdote. Graduated with a Bachelor's in Communication, am currently working in China for an order of magnitude over the cost of living in a position where I had no prior professional experience.

[South Ccanda]

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?

We have classes (At least here in Alabama) that teach you how to file taxes called Financial Algebra where you learn how to build credit, how to shop for the right credit card, different types of insurance coverages, and whatnot. the best math class I ever had.

[Saiwania]

It's only personal anecdote, of course, and my personal example extrapolates to precisely nothing; but all of those humanities and social sciences courses don't seem to have done me any harm.

You're unfortunately the exception rather than the rule these days. What's also true is that college was significantly more valuable 30+ years ago compared to today, but a lot more affordable. How much did you spend on higher education compared to the outrageous cost of it now?

[The Archregimancy]

It's only personal anecdote, of course, and my personal example extrapolates to precisely nothing; but all of those humanities and social sciences courses don't seem to have done me any harm.

You're unfortunately the exception rather than the rule these days. What's also true is that college was significantly more valuable 30+ years ago compared to today, but a lot more affordable. How much did you spend on higher education compared to the outrageous cost of it now?

That's a very difficult question to answer since I went to university in two different countries under two very different methods of funding.

But a quick check suggests that, not adjusting for inflation, tuition at my US undergraduate institution costs 3.5 times more in 2020 than it did in 1990 (my final year of undergraduate education). I'm not going to offer the raw USD figures, but it's fair to note that the rise in cost has far exceeded inflation.

It would be virtually impossible to calculate comparative figures for my two UK postgraduate degrees due to significant shifts in funding methods/expectations since I completed my DPhil in 2000.

[Southern Avarsarstan]

Ah yes, abolishing the humanities - or how you end up with an entrenched political elite and an even more obvious 'pay-to-win' oligarchic system, not to mention the fact that you'll also have a generally less politically informed population.

That said;
- something like taxes is is not a college course - not everyone goes to college. It is something that doesn't even need a full 'course'.
- More power should be given to individual communities to decide those things with loose guide-lines. This entire question misses the issue, and that is that the education system is very very heavily top-down.
- Art and humanities are important for culture, democratic engagement, and individual expression.

[Valkalan]

Ah yes, abolishing the humanities - or how you end up with an entrenched political elite and an even more obvious 'pay-to-win' oligarchic system, not to mention the fact that you'll also have a generally less politically informed population.

To say that abolishing the humanities will somehow cause the entrenchment of a political elite is a non-sequitur. Ironically, we see an overwhelming entrenchment of leftists in academia, meaning that your solution for defeating entrenched political elites is to submit to entrenched academic elites.

In any case, the declining quality of education means that educating people in the humanities, or most anything else, will at best have only a negligible effect on how well informed the population is. And of course, you'd be inundating students in debt with poor job prospects, thereby making them more dependent upon political elites.

Something like taxes is is not a college course - not everyone goes to college. It is something that doesn't even need a full 'course'.

Technically, learning about the tax code is objectively more valuable than the humanities. Learning how to minimize your own tax burden will probably earn you more than you'll get at Starbucks, which is pretty much all that a degree in the humanities will get you. And if you really care to study the humanities, you can log onto many online resources, such The Great Courses Online, for tiny fraction of the expense of a college education! And you'd have access to a far broader range of subject than a college can ever offer you.

More power should be given to individual communities to decide those things with loose guide-lines. This entire question misses the issue, and that is that the education system is very very heavily top-down.

Dealing with local elites will hardly be any better than dealing with the usual "top-down" college elites. And if you really want to take down college elites, just get the state to stop funding college altogether, and eventually people will begin favoring trade schools. College elites will lose their influence, meanwhile students will have actual marketable skills, better job prospects and low debts, lessening their dependence upon political elites.

Art and humanities are important for culture, democratic engagement, and individual expression.

College is a terrible place for such things to thrive. Safe spaces and other such impediments to free speech interfere with individual expression and critical thinking. A lack of critical thinking reduces democratic engagement to a mere popularity contest. It doesn't take a PhD to see that college is not the ideal home for arts and the humanities.

[Kubra]

College is a terrible place for such things to thrive. Safe spaces and other such impediments to free speech interfere with individual expression and critical thinking. A lack of critical thinking reduces democratic engagement to a mere popularity contest. It doesn't take a PhD to see that college is not the ideal home for arts and the humanities.

What are these "safe spaces"? Why do they not exclude that first year libertarian who rants in philosophy classes?

[Totenborg]

Ah yes, abolishing the humanities - or how you end up with an entrenched political elite and an even more obvious 'pay-to-win' oligarchic system, not to mention the fact that you'll also have a generally less politically informed population.

To say that abolishing the humanities will somehow cause the entrenchment of a political elite is a non-sequitur. Ironically, we see an overwhelming entrenchment of leftists in academia, meaning that your solution for defeating entrenched political elites is to submit to entrenched academic elites.

In any case, the declining quality of education means that educating people in the humanities, or most anything else, will at best have only a negligible effect on how well informed the population is. And of course, you'd be inundating students in debt with poor job prospects, thereby making them more dependent upon political elites.

Something like taxes is is not a college course - not everyone goes to college. It is something that doesn't even need a full 'course'.

Technically, learning about the tax code is objectively more valuable than the humanities. Learning how to minimize your own tax burden will probably earn you more than you'll get at Starbucks, which is pretty much all that a degree in the humanities will get you. And if you really care to study the humanities, you can log onto many online resources, such The Great Courses Online, for tiny fraction of the expense of a college education! And you'd have access to a far broader range of subject than a college can ever offer you.

More power should be given to individual communities to decide those things with loose guide-lines. This entire question misses the issue, and that is that the education system is very very heavily top-down.

Dealing with local elites will hardly be any better than dealing with the usual "top-down" college elites. And if you really want to take down college elites, just get the state to stop funding college altogether, and eventually people will begin favoring trade schools. College elites will lose their influence, meanwhile students will have actual marketable skills, better job prospects and low debts, lessening their dependence upon political elites.

Art and humanities are important for culture, democratic engagement, and individual expression.

College is a terrible place for such things to thrive. Safe spaces and other such impediments to free speech interfere with individual expression and critical thinking. A lack of critical thinking reduces democratic engagement to a mere popularity contest. It doesn't take a PhD to see that college is not the ideal home for arts and the humanities.

I'm sure the guy with a swastika stand-in on his flag is really concerned about democracy, individualism, and critical thought.

[Southern Avarsarstan]

To say that abolishing the humanities will somehow cause the entrenchment of a political elite is a non-sequitur. Ironically, we see an overwhelming entrenchment of leftists in academia, meaning that your solution for defeating entrenched political elites is to submit to entrenched academic elites.

In any case, the declining quality of education means that educating people in the humanities, or most anything else, will at best have only a negligible effect on how well informed the population is. And of course, you'd be inundating students in debt with poor job prospects, thereby making them more dependent upon political elites.

It will lead to a less politically adept and engaged citizenship; it will mean fewer people will have the skills to do administrative and policy work and less people will understand the systems. Instead most of this information will be much easier to control, and people will be much easier to manipulate. Just as you believe that learning about the tax code is 'objectively valuable' - knowing the system of government, its powers, and history is also valuable. However, only one of these needs a full course. You should take a look at why Uzbekistan banned political science.

Should also point out that there are not 'poor job prospects' for the humanities and for art. Not to mention that learning how to write or create other forms of art allows you to...make money!



Not even going to respond to the 'entrenched leftists', since its long debunked conspiracy.

Technically, learning about the tax code is objectively more valuable than the humanities. Learning how to minimize your own tax burden will probably earn you more than you'll get at Starbucks, which is pretty much all that a degree in the humanities will get you. And if you really care to study the humanities, you can log onto many online resources, such The Great Courses Online, for tiny fraction of the expense of a college education! And you'd have access to a far broader range of subject than a college can ever offer you.

If you think the only thing you can do with a degree in arts or humanities is work as a barista I'm not sure if you understand what the humanities are.

Also learning how to file taxes and learning the legalities of the tax code is not something that needs a full course, and definitely not something that should be limited to college.

Dealing with local elites will hardly be any better than dealing with the usual "top-down" college elites. And if you really want to take down college elites, just get the state to stop funding college altogether, and eventually people will begin favoring trade schools. College elites will lose their influence, meanwhile students will have actual marketable skills, better job prospects and low debts, lessening their dependence upon political elites.

Defunding education will not do anything but further entrench elites, and devolution will not create elites - that is an extremely statist argument. Also its important to fund both university level education AND trade schools, while giving ALL schools more power at a local level to determine curriculum in tandem with their communities. Those communities know better than some fluff hundreds of miles away what is relevant to them.

College is a terrible place for such things to thrive. Safe spaces and other such impediments to free speech interfere with individual expression and critical thinking. A lack of critical thinking reduces democratic engagement to a mere popularity contest. It doesn't take a PhD to see that college is not the ideal home for arts and the humanities.

I think you have a very confused understanding of how college functions, it seems based more on memes and chan posts than reality. I doubt I can do anything about that except point it out!