Will the Humanities Save Us?

Tokenconservative said:
Hmm...well, bigotry aside: the primary state college where I live includes several Nobel Laureattes (sp?) in, if I do not misremember, physics and genetics.

As I said, pedantry can be fun, but a purposeful misreading of what I've said just makes you sound like well, maybe YOU could use a basic English (reading) course?

Tokie
Click to expand...

Then what did I misread? (And if you had read my post, I said I was purusing a transfer degree. I am actually attending a community college right now)

Okay, yeah....let's break this down.

1. You are confusing me with that bigot. I have no problem with state colleges and unis. They seem like a darn good idear to me.

2. I did not say English. I guess your reading comphrenshun is not as gud as yore speling
This sort of conflation is about what I anticipate, however.

3. Ok. Add another to my list, then: Religious studies.

4. Um...what? I realize you are (apparently) an English prof., but you'll excuse me if I don't (am unable) to respond to something that simply doesn't make any sense.
Click to expand...

1. OK. I happen to agree, it's made it possible for me to attend college when I moved (no chance of me affording the out of state tutition)

2. "even less nonsensical, but nearly equally economically unviable English, or Spanish, or Aramaic Lit., or Philosophy, or 4-yr Anthro, Archeo, Paleo, etc. majors.

3. There are places where it's viable, but then again, that's more cultural enrichment.

4. I'm asking why people should not take those as majors.
 
Tokorona said:
Then what did I misread? (And if you had read my post, I said I was purusing a transfer degree. I am actually attending a community college right now)


1. OK. I happen to agree, it's made it possible for me to attend college when I moved (no chance of me affording the out of state tutition)

2. "even less nonsensical, but nearly equally economically unviable English, or Spanish, or Aramaic Lit., or Philosophy, or 4-yr Anthro, Archeo, Paleo, etc. majors.

3. There are places where it's viable, but then again, that's more cultural enrichment.

4. I'm asking why people should not take those as majors.
Click to expand...

You misread (purposefully) my comments about the use of a state college, assuming that I share your bigotry...I don't. I don't think there are any private colleges that can compare to the primary state colleges here, and I know that places like CalPolyTech, MIT, CalBerkely, U of PA, etc. have programs in valuable areas of study that put most private colleges to shame. Of course, there are Ivy League privates that this does not apply to, but overall, the US has the best, by far, public college/uni system in the world, and because of the funding these places get, they typically make private colleges pale in comparison.

I'm sorry if you disagree...you are just a classist bigot who is mistaken.

Now try and pay attention to what I'm saying (right here, right now...not in some other thread)...read what I SAY, not what it is you WANT me to say...it's a marvelously refreshing approach!

There are certain areas of study--TODAY (not in 1960)--that have virtually (sigh...that means in general and over the wider population, statistically..and no, I don't have a link--LIINNKKKKK!!!--here I again rely upon common sense) no economic viability in TODAY's economy.

These include but are not limited to 4-year (BA or BS) degrees in English (not the LANGUAGE--why is this so hard for pedants to follow? How many people in America graduate with English-language degrees? None?), most of the soft sciences (Psych, Archeo, Paleo, Socio., etc.--sigh, no...this is not a complete catalog...please stop being pedantic), literature in any language, Art, Music, etc., etc.

Sorry, it's been a while since I was in college and I don't have a course catalog before me and no, I am not going to Google it. If you want specifics get out YOUR course catalog and list them I will tell you yay or nay.

That (sigh) out of the way (I hope...IF you have put aside your padantic nature for the moment), please tell me where I can go to find ample lists of employment opportunities for those with say, a BA in 15th C. English Writers? Art Theory? Pacific Island Archelolgy?

Today's work world looks for people educated in areas valuable to TODAY's work world. Yes, in 1960, anybody with a sheepskin in ANY discipline could write his own ticket.

I'm sorry...does that remain true today? If I have a BA in Pre-Colombian Studies, I can walk into those great big glassy offices in Seattle and get a job designing the next version of Windows?

Now, is that to say that NOBODY with such a degree will every find valuable and valued employment...sigh...of course not. But in the main, these such degrees are not economically viable in our world...today.

By the way, what sort of 4-year Liberal Arts degree are YOU persuing, and what sort of career paths do you imagine will open for you with it?

Tokie
 
Tokenconservative said:
Goody.

Then let THEM subsidize philosophy majors. And a lawyer can get his BA/BS in ANYTHING...So, let them get it in Business, or Geology, or Physics, or anything else that will not, if they fail in law school, or fail the bar, lead them to be asking me whether I'd like guac and sour cream on my nachos.

Tokie
Click to expand...

What is it about philosophy and physics that make them the best majors for would-be lawyers? I wonder if it's not a kind of thinking, or a readiness for thinking, as opposed to the content of thoughts that are the most useful.

In any case, you have yet to present any evidence, other than conjecture, about what kinds of incomes those who have specific kinds of B.A.'s could hope to earn. I'm sure that data is available.

http://www.princetonreview.com/college/research/articles/majors/majorsSalaries.asp?adcode=20382

http://articles.moneycentral.msn.co...College/IsYourDegreeWorth1million.aspx?page=1
 
Tokie

I do agree that there are courses that one might reasonably wonder if there is any possible practical application (ever), although a good pass from a good university does indicate an ability to apply oneself and to articulate a point of view. These are skills an employer can utilise and it is surprising to discover the range of degrees held by people in a range of jobs from management, marketing, HR and the like.

Nevertheless some of the courses that have been mentioned do have resale value,

Aramaic, for example, places like the Billy Bob University of Bibliosity pay good money for people that can actually translate or read Aramaic.

Palaeontology and Archaeology are popular interests - people can't get enough of old stuff and museums pay good money for good specimens. One will not get rich doing this kind of work but the people who do it are not the Porsche driving types anyway (not enough room for the spades and muddy boots).

Art and Music - those who do well do very well but just about every advertising company employs graphic artists and media experts.

OK a degree in Feminist Yak Milking might have limited value outside of Outer Mongolia but to be honest there probably isn't such a degree.

One could take the Golgafrincham route and round them all up but then we might find we needed them after all.

One thing I am unclear about is your view that there was more opportunity to study fringe subjects in 1960 but that times have moved on. I can only speak for the UK but I would have said there is a far broader range of fringe subjects now and far more colleges than there were in 1960.
 
Last edited:
Tokenconservative said:
Sorry...I would do this in state colleges: make any non-practical studies non-major studies, unless one is seeking a teaching degree along with it.

So virtually all of the Liberal Arts: English/Lit (any language) History, Philosophy, Film, Acting, non-specific "Music" or "Art" degrees (outside of schools specializing in those areas) all the "ism" studies (Feminism, Race, Ethicity, etc.) out the window, period. They have no practical application in our society today.

I would retain Psychology, Sociology, Archelolgy, Paleontology Poli Sci--any "science" that cannot lead to anything but a job in academia would be retained only as a directed MS plans. In short, no 4-yr degrees in these things would be awarded. as a BS/BA in these is spending tens or even hundreds of thousands to become a waiter.

Business, technology, hard sciences, math majors are the only degrees with any true career viability in today's world, whether we like it or not.

Tokie
Click to expand...

Film and acting degrees have no practical application in our society today? Wow! Does that mean I should give back my MFA in acting? I guess I would have to give back my condo too, and the motorcycles... I wonder if my fiancee should pack it in with her MFA in costume design?

ETA: Oh and I have students that are music majors Should I push them to quit?
 
Last edited:
Think through your day and consider the number of things that needed, at some point or another, to be written. Magazine articles, television shows, radio broadcasts, the advertisements on your cereal box, computer games, notices in the newspaper, newspaper articles, newspaper ads, the instructions that come with your newest piece of electronic gear, the cute story about Thomas Twining on my box of tea... the list goes on, and on, and on. English majors of the world unite!

Oh, and technology and scientific advancements are all well and good, but without a broad underlying culture, and an understanding and appreciation of that culture, where would we be? In other words, liberal studies are necessary to help us bridge the gap between the is and the ought.
 
Last edited:
Stone Island said:
What is it about philosophy and physics that make them the best majors for would-be lawyers? I wonder if it's not a kind of thinking, or a readiness for thinking, as opposed to the content of thoughts that are the most useful.

In any case, you have yet to present any evidence, other than conjecture, about what kinds of incomes those who have specific kinds of B.A.'s could hope to earn. I'm sure that data is available.

http://www.princetonreview.com/college/research/articles/majors/majorsSalaries.asp?adcode=20382

http://articles.moneycentral.msn.co...College/IsYourDegreeWorth1million.aspx?page=1
Click to expand...

I have no idea why those two fields would work in a landshark's favor. I've known lots of lawyers with English degrees of one sort or another.

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.

But then, I was not arguing what you are telling me I am arguing (that's a strawman, by the way). I said a BACHELOR's degree...a law degress is the equivalent of a MASTER's degree.

Do you understand the difference?

Maybe you can google it.

I don't know or care what your links say. I can look in the want ads here and find no ads outside education looking for anyone with the sorts of degrees I am talking about.

Tokie
 
Nogbad said:
Tokie

I do agree that there are courses that one might reasonably wonder if there is any possible practical application (ever), although a good pass from a good university does indicate an ability to apply oneself and to articulate a point of view. These are skills an employer can utilise and it is surprising to discover the range of degrees held by people in a range of jobs from management, marketing, HR and the like.

Nevertheless some of the courses that have been mentioned do have resale value,

Aramaic, for example, places like the Billy Bob University of Bibliosity pay good money for people that can actually translate or read Aramaic.

Palaeontology and Archaeology are popular interests - people can't get enough of old stuff and museums pay good money for good specimens. One will not get rich doing this kind of work but the people who do it are not the Porsche driving types anyway (not enough room for the spades and muddy boots).

Art and Music - those who do well do very well but just about every advertising company employs graphic artists and media experts.

OK a degree in Feminist Yak Milking might have limited value outside of Outer Mongolia but to be honest there probably isn't such a degree.

One could take the Golgafrincham route and round them all up but then we might find we needed them after all.

One thing I am unclear about is your view that there was more opportunity to study fringe subjects in 1960 but that times have moved on. I can only speak for the UK but I would have said there is a far broader range of fringe subjects now and far more colleges than there were in 1960.
Click to expand...

You would think...I did, to be sure. But the "any degree shows that ol' stick-too-it'ivness" is not valid today. Sure, in the 60s and 70s (plastics!) any degree would do. But it's not the 60s and 70s today, and we require far more speciliazation and employers looking for college graduates have so many to pick from they can be more choosey...and are. So the English major who used to be able to land a job as a bank examiner, and be trained to do that work with the expectation that his/her education prepares him/her is a thing of the past. Why would they hire an English major when they can hire Bus, Fin., Accounting, etc. majors who will take about 1/4 of the training? Management: they hire people with Management degrees, or degrees more related to the business...if it's a business that sells 14th Century Spanish Literature, then sure...someone with a degree in 14th Century Spanish Lit would be the way to go.

I don't see many such companies in my local want ads.

I am not talking about special circumstances. Yes, of course, someone with a degree in Aramaic may well find a job...in fact, it's likely they will since so few people have that skill. In GENERAL (sigh) I am talking about the hoardes of graduates from US colleges who come out with (only) 4-year degrees in some discipline that does not have direct application to a SPECIFIC, viable industry TODAY.

I'm not sure whether people replying to this are being purposely obtuse or are just reacting to the person posting it and are attempting (without much success) to show what a "dumby" that poster is. Clearly, the odd graduate with a Feminist Yak Milking degree is going to get a job in which the skills and knowledge she gained getting that degree will serve her well. Perhapst the local zoo has a herd of Yaks, and as she lives in a very liberal city the fact that she is a FEMINIST, makes here a shoo-in, but that won't help her secure such employment on a yak farm in Montana necessarily.

I did not say "round them all up." I said make disciplines with little-to-no applicability in TODAY's work force more specialize: you want a degree in 14th Century Spanish Lit, you have to sign up to get at LEAST a master's and you MUST be directing your efforts toward a career teaching that subject in college, meaning before you are permitted to begin majoring in that, you need to prove there is a current and future demand for x-number of people to fill that job and sign some sort of contract (public colleges only...sigh) stating that if you don't secure related work after graduation, you need to pay the state back for wasting its money. Now, of course special circumstances will apply: you get a Animal Psych degree and still manage to get a job at Microsoft running their new projects dept..fine! But the reality is, very, very, very, very (did I say "very?" few such graduates will land such jobs, and that's just reality.

Again, not sure whether I am being unclear or you are being obtuse. I am not talking about "fringe" subjects, necessarily. The reality is that an English (rational people not trying to shriek "dumby!!" at Tokie understand that this is going to be a degree in the LITERATURE of English-speaking peoples, not in the LANGUAGE). I am talking about subjects that yes, in 1960s were fine. Then ANY sheepskin was a wonderous thing given that so few were issued, here or there. Now? Most waiters have masters degrees here...not sure how that works out there. Most of these degrees are not in particle physics or financial management. They are in things like English (sigh...no, not the LANGUAGE...), Psych, Arecho, Philosophy, etc.

Here too there are more colleges, and especially those that cater to very directed learning--specific, very needed fields such as nursing and truck driving, etc. Again, in 1960, having a 4-year college degree was viewed as quite a prize because so few had them, here or in the UK. Today (here, anyway) it's more like having a high school diploma was in 1960, whether or not those desperate to prove what a "dumby" Tokie is care to admit it or not, or whether they demand a link--LIIIINNKKKKKK!!!!--proving it.

It is what it is.

Tokie
 
Tokenconservative said:
I have no idea why those two fields would work in a landshark's favor. I've known lots of lawyers with English degrees of one sort or another.

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.

But then, I was not arguing what you are telling me I am arguing (that's a strawman, by the way). I said a BACHELOR's degree...a law degress is the equivalent of a MASTER's degree.

Do you understand the difference?

Maybe you can google it.

I don't know or care what your links say. I can look in the want ads here and find no ads outside education looking for anyone with the sorts of degrees I am talking about.

Tokie
Click to expand...

Shorter Tokie:

Evidence? Who needs evidence?
​
 
Tokenconservative said:
But then, I was not arguing what you are telling me I am arguing (that's a strawman, by the way). I said a BACHELOR's degree...a law degress is the equivalent of a MASTER's degree.

Do you understand the difference?

Maybe you can google it.
Click to expand...

Just a heads-up: A law degree is in fact a Bachelor's degree. LL.B. = Bachelor of Laws. It is not the equivalent of a Master's degree, even with the extra entrance requirements and extra prestige.
 
D'rok said:
Just a heads-up: A law degree is in fact a Bachelor's degree. LL.B. = Bachelor of Laws. It is not the equivalent of a Master's degree, even with the extra entrance requirements and extra prestige.
Click to expand...

In the U.S., it's a J.D., or Juris Doctor, which, according to Wikipedia (a.k.a. We're As Wrong As Often As the Encyclopedia Britannica), is different than Canada's degree.
 
Stone Island said:
In the U.S., it's a J.D., or Juris Doctor, which, according to Wikipedia (a.k.a. We're As Wrong As Often As the Encyclopedia Britannica), is different than Canada's degree.
Click to expand...
Ah, I see you are correct.

Wackypedia says this about the difference:

"The primary difference between a LL.B. and J.D. degree is that the LL.B. is an academic undergraduate degree, and often requires the study of the history and philosophy of law, while the J.D. is a professional graduate degree that concentrates on practical skills and requires no study of the history and philosophy of law."

So a J.D. has all the good stuff taken out. ;)
 
Tokie is still begging the question, of course. Why would a philosophy degree, one of the most practically useless degrees, be the most sought after degrees for the study of law?

Also, should college studies be little more than fancy, gussied-up vocational studies?
 
Jeff Corey said:
Tokenconservative said:
...I

I would retain Psychology, Sociology, Archelolgy, Paleontology Poli Sci--any "science" that cannot lead to anything but a job in academia would be retained only as a directed MS plans. In short, no 4-yr degrees in these things would be awarded. as a BS/BA in these is spending tens or even hundreds of thousands to become a waiter.

Business, technology, hard sciences, math majors are the only degrees with any true career viability in today's world, whether we like it or not.

Tokie
Click to expand...
Siily goose. I have a degree in Psychology and I am smarter and richer than you.
Click to expand...

I hope you don't think that is a particularly impressive achievement...

How would history get taught if not by history graduates

Sorry...I would do this in state colleges: make any non-practical studies non-major studies, unless one is seeking a teaching degree along with it.

So virtually all of the Liberal Arts: English/Lit (any language) History, Philosophy, Film, Acting, non-specific "Music" or "Art" degrees (outside of schools specializing in those areas) all the "ism" studies (Feminism, Race, Ethicity, etc.) out the window, period. They have no practical application in our society today.
Click to expand...

Tokenconservative said:
From everything I've seen and read and heard over the years the simplest answer is: a damn sight better'n they are taught INSIDE America.

By far.

Tokie
Click to expand...

So it doesn't matter that it is taught so badly, and that by removing any history graduates, the knowledge and understanding would get worse.

The history of the UK Civil service mightn't be a brilliant advertisment for organisations with their upper echelons dominated by humanities and classics graduates, but that is not to say the education is without merit.

Foreign policy considerations should be informed by history, because the attitudes in different countries are formed by their local history.

In the last Gulf War, it would have been a propaganda disaster for the British to march into Baghdad as the (1925?) invasion is an important local story.

Further to this, if one knows what happened in previous similar situations, one could be aware of similar events happening again, and prepare for them.

I am choosing history, but could have chosen many other subjects.

I am dubious about the academic merits of certain voccational degrees, however, but then so are employers.

If someone wants employability, then they can choose an employable degree. Its a market.
 
Stone Island said:
Tokie is still begging the question, of course. Why would a philosophy degree, one of the most practically useless degrees, be the most sought after degrees for the study of law?

Also, should college studies be little more than fancy, gussied-up vocational studies?
Click to expand...

I would guess because Philosophy is partly an exercise in semantics and law requires people who can think like that.

Tokie

There is obviously a question of supply and demand and although there is undoubtedly a place for English Lit. one can get too much of a good thing. ;)

I don't know enough about the numbers being produced in the States in relation to where the shortfall of skills are. Here, typically Maths and Engineering tend to be under-subscribed and the Arts over-subscribed and it is true that graduates in the latter find it harder to secure a well paid job - not sure they are quite at the waiting tables and serving in fast food joints after graduation though.
 
Stone Island said:
Tokie is still begging the question, of course. Why would a philosophy degree, one of the most practically useless degrees, be the most sought after degrees for the study of law?

Also, should college studies be little more than fancy, gussied-up vocational studies?
Click to expand...

I get the feeling you really don't know what "begging the question means."

Then you ask ME to explain why this would be. I have no idea.

You claim to have come across that tid-bit...did it make any explanation? I thought it did? Why is it necessary for me to back down from my broader assertion that most such degrees do not serve those who get them very well because in a few cases they do?

Are you at ALL able to engage in LOGICAL discourse?

Tokie
 
Stone Island said:
Shorter Tokie:

Evidence? Who needs evidence?
​
Click to expand...

You need me to post a link to what...Wiki in order for you to believe there is a difference between a degree bearing a "B" and one bearing an "M"...?

Sorry, I assumed I was dealing with debators who had at least a minimum understanding of these things. I am not going to attempt to do this. If you don't know the difference, go look it up.

Educate yourself, then come back.

Tokie
 
jimbob said:
I hope you don't think that is a particularly impressive achievement...

How would history get taught if not by history graduates


So it doesn't matter that it is taught so badly, and that by removing any history graduates, the knowledge and understanding would get worse.

The history of the UK Civil service mightn't be a brilliant advertisment for organisations with their upper echelons dominated by humanities and classics graduates, but that is not to say the education is without merit.

Foreign policy considerations should be informed by history, because the attitudes in different countries are formed by their local history.

In the last Gulf War, it would have been a propaganda disaster for the British to march into Baghdad as the (1925?) invasion is an important local story.

Further to this, if one knows what happened in previous similar situations, one could be aware of similar events happening again, and prepare for them.

I am choosing history, but could have chosen many other subjects.

I am dubious about the academic merits of certain voccational degrees, however, but then so are employers.

If someone wants employability, then they can choose an employable degree. Its a market.
Click to expand...

Sigh...it's so imporatant to read what other actually write, rather than what it is your leftist ideology DEMANDS they write... a refreshing approach that I highly recommend!

I said that yes, of course, those intending to teach in these areas wouldl um..yeah, get degrees in these areas.

Duh. If you'll partdon the expression.

The point was (had you actually read what I wrote, rather than what you need me to write to support your leftist view of me) that those planning to teach would declare that at the outset. Those planning to "get a college degree" would have to (sigh... in state subsidized...sigh, yes...I know that many private institutions get government money for specific studies...sigh...colleges) be more specific. If they want a history degree but do not plan to teach, they'd have to demonstrate where people with such degrees are in demand in the workforce.

This is really pretty simple stuff if you read what I write, rather than what your leftist ideology forces you to believe I am writing.

I am not discussing the quality of the education here. I imagine you can find schools that teach everything that is taught badly-to-very well. What does this red herring have to do with anything?

UK Civil Service until very recently was also closed to anyone without the right accent....So?

Again...can you tie this to the subject? I'm not sure some GI needs to know what happened to the Brits in '25, old sock!

I say, old chap, do try and stay on topic, won't you?

Tokie
 
The point was (had you actually read what I wrote, rather than what you need me to write to support your leftist view of me) that those planning to teach would declare that at the outset. Those planning to "get a college degree" would have to (sigh... in state subsidized...sigh, yes...I know that many private institutions get government money for specific studies...sigh...colleges) be more specific. If they want a history degree but do not plan to teach, they'd have to demonstrate where people with such degrees are in demand in the workforce.
Click to expand...

So you could be able to get a degree in teaching a subject but not in the actual subject?

It would make more sense to have a postgrduate qualification in the teaching, once you have demonstrated adequate mastery of the subject, with a degree. Maybe we could call it a "Postgraduate Certificate in Education".

The GIs didn't need to know what happened to the British in 1925, their commanders needed to know what happened to the Iraqis, and thus why they would react badly to something that might otherwise seem innocuous.

IIRC, the US DoD is now employing anthropologists.

If history graduates can't get jobs, then very few people would take history. If they can get jobs, and consider a history degree not to be beneficial, then they wouldn't bother putting this on their CVs.


If they want a history degree but do not plan to teach, they'd have to demonstrate where people with such degrees are in demand in the workforce.
Click to expand...

My guess is that prospective students would all claim to be planning to teach, and then many would "decide that it is not for them", and get other jobs. If they do get a job how do you demonstrate that their degree didn't help them get it?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom