Will the Humanities Save Us?

volatile said:
Some of them get jobs in galleries, auction houses, museums and libraries. Some of them become lawyers, civil servants. And yes, some of them become receptionists, housewives and drug dealers. But that's true of physics, engineering and computer science graduates too; it's certainly not unique to BAs.

There's a weird presumption to your train of thought that a degree is useless unless it leads directly to a job in the same exact field, which is clearly absurd. Aside form the fact that education is sufficient as an end in itself (a different argument for another day), there are far more types of job than there are types of degree. It would simply not be practical or sensible to run degree courses in every conceivable possible job; rather, an undergraduate education, in any field, arts or science, should aim to produce well-rounded, articulate, well-read human beings who are adaptable, capable and innovative; skills which are of use in a wide range of skills.

You were an English teacher, right? Surely you must understand the value in having a culturally-literate society? Surely you understand how an awareness of literature and its history is inordinately beneficial to both individuals and societies?

Is the only purpose of education to produce employees?
Click to expand...

Ah...an intelligent argument...

First, are you a Brit, Vol? Teaching in a Brit college? Wonderful if so, sort of like most folks idea of a dream come true...but if so, you have no idea in hell what you are talking about on THIS side of the pond (just as I don't on YOUR side).

It's not an issue of what is possible (what jobs these folks will get) it's an issue of what's likely. Again, you need to stop throwing "lawyer" into this, too. That's begging the question...not sure how it works there, but in the US, a legal degree (essentially a masters) is required (sigh....generally) to become a lawyer.

I make no such presumption...that's your non sequitur...has nothing to do with me. I covered waht I "presume": that today's marketplace is looking for more and more specialization, not less and less. Are there some few career areas where this is not true...I suppose. But in the US economy, today, specialization is the rule, not the exception.

Your non sequtur extends to a false dilemma. I am not stating that it is an either/or situtation in ALL cases, nor am I saying that every career has a specific degree attached to it. You don't go to a business school and get a MBA in Hedge Fund Management, of course. Wild, illogical claims of what I am saying, notwithstanding.

But your chances of entering the hedge fund management industry with a BA in Art History, while not entirely impossible, is highly unlikely simply because of the numbers of better(likely-qualified entry-level candidates coming out of MBA programs competing with that BA in Art History.

I was a 5th grade teacher; I sub teach when I have time, at all levels and do indeed understand the importance of a culturally literate (to a degree) population...I see the lack of that ever time I teach high school literature--in the teachers (most of them) who I am filling in for who lack any deep understanding of their subject.

Once again: I excluded those heading for teaching from this, not that I think that would improve their skills in that regard.

It is important for students to be exposed to a wide range of things, including what most of us thing of as the "liberal arts." This is why in the US, college students must take "elective" courses outside their major/minor areas of study, regardless of what those areas are.

Does this mean a software engineer needs to be able to quote Milton, spot a Monet from across the room, identify Mahler from 3 bars, or expound on Jungian vs. Freudian theory?

Good idea to know a bit about all sorts of things, but you still are not going to go into Chase Manhattan with your BA in Art History and get a job running their acquisitions dept.

Tokie

Tokie
 
volatile said:
Well, you did ask for the ads. "Show me the ads on Jobs.com", you said. So I did.

Don't put your back out moving those goalposts, will you now?

You'll note at the top of this very page I pointed out that I worked in the industry as a translator, interpreter and purchasing agent. That was 2002-2006. I also worked in Europe doing similar jobs between 1999-2000, as a sandwich year from my degree.

My undergrad job was in French and German, so I haven't applied for any jobs that required a sociology undergrad, no. I do, as I said, now teach undergrad and Master's art history, and my students do apply for, and do get, jobs (including ones similar to those I posted ads for). I don't know what more I can tell you.

Errrm. Well, some of those links were to US jobs. And yes, they specifically asked for Psych. None of them were for art history, because that wasn't on your list. Nevertheless, a 2-second search on Jobs.com turned up Senior Buyer, "A love of history, or history of art, is an advantage".

Also, even if we presume you're correct is assuming that those jobs do go to Masters or (more unlikely) doctoral candidates, all of those people will still have done these supposedly irrelevant undergrad degrees. You can't get a Psychology MA without a BA! If, as these ads show, there is an market need for liberal arts graduates, then liberal arts degrees are useful.

As usual, TC, evidence trumps opinion. You said "No-one wants liberal arts grads". They do. Demonstrably.
Click to expand...

I fail in these debates in this regard: I always assume I am talking to reasonably rational adults. Teenagers believe things are black and white...and college profs.

Don't put your back out moving my goalposts....

Once again: why would an employer (and I happen to be one in the private sector) employ someone at the same wage who holds only a BA when there are plenty of people with MAs also applying for the job? Now, is that to say that an particular employer won't? No. But I am not talking about a particular employer...we can't do that in a real discussion about this sort of thing. I am talking again, sigh, in general.

Do you even know what a "senior buyer" is, by the way?

Tokie
 
Tokenconservative said:
Once again: why would an employer (and I happen to be one in the private sector) employ someone at the same wage who holds only a BA when there are plenty of people with MAs also applying for the job? Now, is that to say that an particular employer won't? No. But I am not talking about a particular employer...we can't do that in a real discussion about this sort of thing. I am talking again, sigh, in general.
Click to expand...

To get an MA, you need a BA. Note also that most of those ads I linked did not specify qualifications beyond Batchelors.

Do you even know what a "senior buyer" is, by the way?
Click to expand...

Yes. Do you?
 
volatile said:
To get an MA, you need a BA. Note also that most of those ads I linked did not specify qualifications beyond Batchelors.



Yes. Do you?
Click to expand...

That's one of the (many) benefits of working withing the cloistered Ivy Halls, you really don't have to pay much attention to the real world.

Also, I believe you are in GB?

Things may be different here. Whereas 40 years ago a BA (in anything) was a relative rarity and such ads would've read "high school graduate required," today they require a BA. The problem is that BAs are rare as water molecules. Even MA/MS and MBAs are not so rare any longer. I think most of the people I know who have college educations have masters degrees.

Indeed, some of the profs I learned from in college were older hires (nearing retirement) and several of them had only MA/MS degrees...one, who retired while I was there (early 90s) and had been there since the place opened in the early 70s had only a BA in History.

You can't get a job at a rural junior college today, in America, without a minimum MA/MS.

Things change. Apparently. Maybe I'm mistaken. Back in the day, when I was growing up, we were told get ANY sheepskin and you write your own ticket. And then, it was probably true (60s and 70s when, again, even a BA/BS was a rarity). Today...your ads for what are virtually minimum wage jobs notwithstanding, things seem to be different.

I believe I know what a senior buyer is, but since you are claiming this is some sort of dream job that anyone with an Art History major has set his or her sights on since childhood, and since you say that you know what it is, why don't you just tell us instead of playing this childish game?

Tokie
 
Does this mean a software engineer needs to be able to quote Milton, spot a Monet from across the room, identify Mahler from 3 bars, or expound on Jungian vs. Freudian theory?
Click to expand...
I love it when you hurt your argument unknowingly. The answer is yes an engineer should know some psychology. I would also throw some theater into that too. I would also say music is a good idea. It all depends on what you want to do. Psychology and theater are utilized in robotics. When I first started college music classes were recommended if I wanted to go work at a company like Bose.
It's not an issue of what is possible (what jobs these folks will get) it's an issue of what's likely. Again, you need to stop throwing "lawyer" into this, too. That's begging the question...not sure how it works there, but in the US, a legal degree (essentially a masters) is required (sigh....generally) to become a lawyer.
Click to expand...
Nope. That isn't even correct. If you want to become a patent attorney you do not get your law degree first.
 
Last edited:
Sociology includes the sociology of science, that is, the study of how science is organised and performed from a social point of view. Out of this field grew the "strong program", or post-modernist hyper-relativism.

The sociologists of the strong program, which is luckily on its way to extinction, argued that scientific research and results are not just influenced by the social context in which they are produced. The strong program held that scientific knowledge is entirely reducible to such social factors, that is, that it has nothing to do with any objective reality. Simply put, it only rains outside if most of us agree to believe that it rains.
 
Last edited:
Tokenconservative said:
It wouldn't surprise me to learn in our technological age that a lawyer with a science sheepskin would be in demand. Philosophy? Beats me.
Click to expand...

Beats me too. I have no idea how studying logic, ethics, or political philosophy could possibly be useful in a law degree.
 
TokenConservative:

If there is a demand for graduates with masters level degrees in the liberal arts, how exactly do you propose we get those graduates unless they have completed a bachelors degree in liberal arts first?
 
Mobyseven said:
TokenConservative:

If there is a demand for graduates with masters level degrees in the liberal arts, how exactly do you propose we get those graduates unless they have completed a bachelors degree in liberal arts first?
Click to expand...

I do believe I already asked him that... :)
 
volatile said:
I do believe I already asked him that... :)
Click to expand...

Well, yeah, but you had so many words in your post. He might've missed it or glazed over (mmm...donuts) or sumfing. :p

Mobyseven: Giving the benefit of the doubt since about 11.45 Australian Eastern Standard Time (Daylight Savings applies).
 
technoextreme said:
I love it when you hurt your argument unknowingly. The answer is yes an engineer should know some psychology. I would also throw some theater into that too. I would also say music is a good idea. It all depends on what you want to do. Psychology and theater are utilized in robotics. When I first started college music classes were recommended if I wanted to go work at a company like Bose.

Nope. That isn't even correct. If you want to become a patent attorney you do not get your law degree first.
Click to expand...

Um...okay...

It would be NICE if an engineer knows Monet from Gauguin, sure...is it necessary to MOST engineering jobs? Prolly not.

As to the other bit of pedantry...okay, so a patent attorney (very small area of specilization) gets what, first? An English degree? Philosophy?

When you say things like this, do you actually think about them first, or is it that your knee is jerking so violently up into your keyboard that your fingers just dance across the keys mindless of what it is you actually mean to say?

Tokie
 
Mobyseven said:
Beats me too. I have no idea how studying logic, ethics, or political philosophy could possibly be useful in a law degree.
Click to expand...

Why is it that in this conversation, logic utterly escapes those taking the opposite stance?

Let's revisit:
I say: most BS/BAs in the liberal arts are valueless in today's economy.

You say: What about a Law degree!!!????@2111!!!??//?

Tokie
 
Mobyseven said:
TokenConservative:

If there is a demand for graduates with masters level degrees in the liberal arts, how exactly do you propose we get those graduates unless they have completed a bachelors degree in liberal arts first?
Click to expand...

I believe I covered that. I guess you were so busy believing yourself oh, so clever, you missed it.

Anyone taking one of the non-economically viable degrees would have to agree to do so through at least the masters level, or would not be permitted to take out loans or get (non private) grants, etc. to do so.

By the way...I am talking about America, not Australia. Mayhaps in Oz, there are employers stupid enough to hire say, a English major to design hydroelectric dams...we do it...differently here.

Tokie
 
Tokenconservative said:
I say: most BS/BAs in the liberal arts are valueless in today's economy.
Click to expand...

And we present all kinds of evidence (including Census data) that people who get these kinds of degrees happily go on making a living at levels quite a bit above the median for poverty. And you say, "Yeah, but, we're is the ad on Monster?" Begging the question, "Why does an ad on Monster matter when it's clear that people who earn those kinds of degree do in fact earn livings in today's economy?"

You've still never begun to grapple with the question of why is a philosophy degree tied for the number 1 most useful degree for getting a law degree in the United States when, on a knee jerk level, a philosophy degree is as far away from a vocationally useful degree as one could get?

Another question you're begging: what is the connection between particular vocational skills, general or liberal education, and fruitful employment?

Come on Tokie, quit trolling around.
 
Stone Island said:
And we present all kinds of evidence (including Census data) that people who get these kinds of degrees happily go on making a living at levels quite a bit above the median for poverty. And you say, "Yeah, but, we're is the ad on Monster?" Begging the question, "Why does an ad on Monster matter when it's clear that people who earn those kinds of degree do in fact earn livings in today's economy?"
Click to expand...

You know, there are 2 possible factors that could explain people with 'useless' degrees having statistically higher income....

Factor 1:

While most people who get "liberal arts" degrees (example: B.A. in basket weaving), there is still SOME demand for people with those skills. So, if 100 people get a degree in basket weaving, 1 person ends up getting a job where those skills are useful and the remaining 99 get the exact same job they would have had they not had any degree, then yes, the average income will be higher, even if the vast majority of people with the degree are no better off.

I have seen some arguments in this thread about how a degree in philosophy might help someone in a law career. That may be true... but what percentage of philosophy majors actually go on to become successful lawyers? Is it worth us (as a society) to subsidize the 99% of people who get a (relatively) useless degree, in order to help the 1% that actually benefit from the degree?

There were also postings in this thread regarding job ads that included liberal arts education in their qualifications. Those jobs may exist, but are they really significant? Or do such available job openings accept only a tiny fraction of those people with a liberal arts education.

Factor 2:

Ok, getting a degree in English Literature, Poetry or basket weaving may be useless to many people; however, it still requires a certain amount of intelligence and work ethic. People who get 'worthless' degrees, and then go on to be financially successful, may not owe their success to their degree, but to their skills.

Earlier in the thread someone posted a statistic which showed certain philosophy graduates used their education in their general life. Isn't it just as likely that they naturally had the ability to be adaptable, etc. prior to getting their degree, and it is this natural skill that is useful rather than their actual education?
 
Segnosaur said:
Factor 2:

Ok, getting a degree in English Literature, Poetry or basket weaving may be useless to many people; however, it still requires a certain amount of intelligence and work ethic. People who get 'worthless' degrees, and then go on to be financially successful, may not owe their success to their degree, but to their skills.

Earlier in the thread someone posted a statistic which showed certain philosophy graduates used their education in their general life. Isn't it just as likely that they naturally had the ability to be adaptable, etc. prior to getting their degree, and it is this natural skill that is useful rather than their actual education?
Click to expand...

One of the first things you learn when studying political behavior, for instance, is that the direction of influence (say the relationship between public opinion and the behavior of political actors) is that the arrow in the flow chart often points in several directions, with mediating influences, unintended consequences, and feedback.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom