5 ms·

I disagree slightly. Mostly because you can find dozens of commentaries and critical analyses of great works of fiction to complement your reading. These are e

by neap24 10y ago

I disagree slightly. Mostly because you can find dozens of commentaries and critical analyses of great works of fiction to complement your reading. These are essentially transmitting the same info a knowledgeable teacher/group of classmates would. The resources for math and science are also vast, but often require access to specialized laborites/equipment at the upper levels.

ethanbond 10y ago
Uhh... no they're not "essentially the same." The value of being in the same room as knowledgeable people is interacting with them. If there's something that is unclear or that you want to delve into, you have an interactive way to do so. This whole "self-learning is just as good!" is ridiculous. If it was, it would already rule the world. People trust accreditation for a reason.
- xiaoma 10y ago
  It already does rule the world. The greatest writers, actors, musicians, engineers, salespeople, marketers and entrepreneurs nearly all mastered their craft outside of brick an mortar institutions You have a PHD in drama? Good for you. I'd rather watch a high school drop out like Leonardo DiCaprio. You have a PHD in computer graphics? That's nice, but once again a dropout beat you to it. He currently leads Oculus Rift. Marketers? Salespeople? Businesspeople? Authors? Seriously... try to name even one at the very top of the game who became that way through formal schooling. It's not easy.
  - ethanbond 10y ago
    Oh good, so all you have to do is be a prodigy! Sure, maybe the top 1% is self-taught (probably not, though, you're just selecting for your point). How about the next 15%?
    - xiaoma 10y ago
      My comment was not a guide on how you can "rule the world", in your words. I was simply pointing out that those at the very top are "self-learning". The examples I gave should make it incredibly clear that people can and do learn enough to get to the top of their fields without going through a formal process. It doesn't mean that you will. It doesn't mean that there are no fields with rigid credential requirements. It does mean that no formal body controls education, only schooling and credentials. >"Sure, maybe the top 1% is self-taught (probably not, though, you're just selecting for your point)." Another thing to think about is that with or without credentials in their past, at the very top everybody is self-taught. No business school on earth can teach Zuckerberg exactly how to set Facebook's strategy. He's got to make his own curriculum.
- basch 10y ago
  At the same time, I can interact with the web. I can google questions, I can read discussions that take place between other people, I can chime in, I can be replied to. I would probably find it more useful to be able to read all the TOP QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS from all the Roman History 101 discussions around the world, than just whatever came up in my class. Being able to sort by global best as opposed to local loudest sounds very useful.

by neap24 10y ago

ethanbond 10y ago

Uhh... no they're not "essentially the same." The value of being in the same room as knowledgeable people is interacting with them. If there's something that is unclear or that you want to delve into, you have an interactive way to do so. This whole "self-learning is just as good!" is ridiculous. If it was, it would already rule the world. People trust accreditation for a reason.

xiaoma 10y ago
It already does rule the world. The greatest writers, actors, musicians, engineers, salespeople, marketers and entrepreneurs nearly all mastered their craft outside of brick an mortar institutions You have a PHD in drama? Good for you. I'd rather watch a high school drop out like Leonardo DiCaprio. You have a PHD in computer graphics? That's nice, but once again a dropout beat you to it. He currently leads Oculus Rift. Marketers? Salespeople? Businesspeople? Authors? Seriously... try to name even one at the very top of the game who became that way through formal schooling. It's not easy.
- ethanbond 10y ago
  Oh good, so all you have to do is be a prodigy! Sure, maybe the top 1% is self-taught (probably not, though, you're just selecting for your point). How about the next 15%?
  - xiaoma 10y ago
    My comment was not a guide on how you can "rule the world", in your words. I was simply pointing out that those at the very top are "self-learning". The examples I gave should make it incredibly clear that people can and do learn enough to get to the top of their fields without going through a formal process. It doesn't mean that you will. It doesn't mean that there are no fields with rigid credential requirements. It does mean that no formal body controls education, only schooling and credentials. >"Sure, maybe the top 1% is self-taught (probably not, though, you're just selecting for your point)." Another thing to think about is that with or without credentials in their past, at the very top everybody is self-taught. No business school on earth can teach Zuckerberg exactly how to set Facebook's strategy. He's got to make his own curriculum.
basch 10y ago
At the same time, I can interact with the web. I can google questions, I can read discussions that take place between other people, I can chime in, I can be replied to. I would probably find it more useful to be able to read all the TOP QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS from all the Roman History 101 discussions around the world, than just whatever came up in my class. Being able to sort by global best as opposed to local loudest sounds very useful.