5 ms·

I would say a technical education is an education, but I agree, pure academia isn't for everyone - though the article doesn't distinguish this. In fact, Switze

by dm319 9y ago

I would say a technical education is an education, but I agree, pure academia isn't for everyone - though the article doesn't distinguish this. In fact, Switzerland does very well by the OECD metric [1]. Why is education important? Can I suggest we compare two countries singled out in the article as 'could do better's - the USA and UK, and their recent democratic decisions. Compare that to Canada's cabinet, who, for example, has appointed someone with a PhD as minister for science [2], a doctor as minister for health [3] etc etc. I don't think I need to give examples of Scandinavian countries which regularly top the rankings for both wealth and pay equality. Maybe a population where the country has valued education are less likely to say they "have had enough of experts" [4], more likely to respect the knowledge of a specialist, and more likely to have skills which are capable of transferring to the changing work market. The problem is that investing in education has its pay-offs 20-30 years down the line, which is why, even if we believe in education, governments are reluctant to actually spend the money on it. [1] http://www.oecd.org/edu/bycountry/switzerland/ http://www.oecd.org/edu/bycountry/switzerland/ [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kirsty_Duncan https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kirsty_Duncan [3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jane_Philpott https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jane_Philpott [4] https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Michael_Gove https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Michael_Gove

ThomPete 9y ago
But again I must come back to the simple thing that appointing a PHD as a minister for science means very little because politics aren't science or business for that matter. Politics are humans prioritizing various intersociety related issues and many of these prioritization are scientifically or rationally absurd but are the right solution for the collective. The very idea that better educated people make better decisions in politics is simply wrong as far as I can see. Canada isn't benefitting anymore than Finland is. There are bigger factors that count.
- dm319 9y ago
  > The very idea that better educated people make better decisions in politics is simply wrong as far as I can see. "Whenever the people are well-informed, they can be trusted with their own government" --Thomas Jefferson But also a country that values education is more likely to value the opinion of an expert, more likely to question a promise or political sound bite. E2E encryption is a good example of the divide between politics and the science. I'm not saying that the computer scientists have the answer here, but ignoring what they say is not the way to come to a policy that will benefit the country.
  - ThomPete 9y ago
    Again there is a difference between fundamentals and then optimizations. The point i am trying to make is that it doesent matter whether you are number #1 or #30 what matters is whether your population on average is educated
  - humanrebar 9y ago
    Regarding the Jefferson quote, John Adams (surprise!) didn't agree: “Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.” Point being, you'll need more than a Jefferson quote to establish your point that information is sufficient for a competent electorate.
    - dm319 9y ago
      Fair point. However, being well-informed is seen to be important in being able to make a decision in other areas of life (legal system, medical treatment). I agree though that there are cultural differences of opinion on this.
      - ThomPete 9y ago
        Being a expert in Law does not make you an expert in life. Politics is about the life for all of us. Rich and poor, well educated and white trash.
        dm319 9y ago
        Ok I get your point, and I agree. The vote is for everyone, and everyone is able to assess how happy they are with what is going on. I'm not sure Brexit or Trump are going to do any good for the poorly educated and poor, however. Both were protest / anti-establishment votes, which fell nicely into the hands of the privileged.[1] [1] https://www.ft.com/content/b3d62bcc-7713-11e7-90c0-90a9d1bc9691 https://www.ft.com/content/b3d62bcc-7713-11e7-90c0-90a9d1bc9...
        9y ago
al_chemist 9y ago
> their recent democratic decisions. > for example, has appointed someone with a PhD as minister for science [2], a doctor as minister for health [3] etc etc. You elect ministers in direct elections? Otherwise it's like watching prime minister in a restaurant and announcing "Democracy has decided! We are having chicken risotto tonight!"
- dm319 9y ago
  No we don't. But if the public do not care for experts, then there is no political incentive to appoint, or listen to, experts.
ChrisjayHenn 9y ago
In regards to your third paragraph, I would posit the opposite causality occurs as well - in a country where academia is seen as an honorable profession for morally upstanding people, people with integrity are more likely to pursue academics, and as a result there are fewer examples of dishonesty by these same experts [1]. Of course, this dynamic can cause a vicious cycle in any field, politics being a common example. [1]https://www.nas.org/articles/Estimated_40_Percent_of_Scientists_Doubt_Manmade_Global_Warming https://www.nas.org/articles/Estimated_40_Percent_of_Scienti...
hoorayimhelping 9y ago
>the USA and UK, and their recent democratic decisions. As long as people (especially educated liberal leaning people) keep framing recent elections as "dumb people elected Trump cause they're dumb," we're going to keep getting Trumps in the elected office. One of the loudest things communicated in the last election in America is that people who don't vote like you are tired of the patronizing, condescending and presumptuous tone. Rather than characterizing the outcome of the last election as "uneducated people elected an asshole", it might do well to understand the concerns of the people who elected him, rather than dismissing them offhand.
- dm319 9y ago
  I hear this argument a lot. Just because something is inflammatory, doesn't mean it isn't true [1]. It also doesn't mean discussing it will cause it to happen again. It also doesn't mean that we can't also look into the causes and concerns of said people and the vote. Improving education allows people to develop skills for a changing job market, as well as recognise that some promises [2] were suspect from the start. My opinion is that these were two contributing factors to vote result. [1] http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-38762034 http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-38762034 [2] https://www.google.co.uk/amp/www.indy100.com/article/7-brexit-promises-that-have-already-been-abandoned--b1Ne7rGnZDZ%3famp https://www.google.co.uk/amp/www.indy100.com/article/7-brexi...
  - ThomPete 9y ago
    Education has far less to do with being educated than the word might allude to. Having a university degree is no guarantee against a stupid electorate.
    - dm319 9y ago
      I totally agree. It's a surrogate marker for something that is much harder to measure.
    - pm90 9y ago
      The thing though is that a university degree does confer some amount of critical thinking on most of its graduates. I'm rather skeptical that every college graduate is guaranteed to be a smart, critical thinking, nuances person. But I do feel comfortable in saying that most are. And even those that aren't, have been exposed to people who are, have created social networks etc. So I don't think being a college educated Republican/Conservative is a contradiction. The difference is the college educated person is more likely to believe in facts and reasoned arguments than appeals to passion, or native tribalism. They are more likely to have more faith in institutions, including democracy. I think its hard for someone who went to college to relate to a person who hasn't been in terms of what kind of effect college has on their lives.

by dm319 9y ago

ThomPete 9y ago

But again I must come back to the simple thing that appointing a PHD as a minister for science means very little because politics aren't science or business for that matter. Politics are humans prioritizing various intersociety related issues and many of these prioritization are scientifically or rationally absurd but are the right solution for the collective. The very idea that better educated people make better decisions in politics is simply wrong as far as I can see. Canada isn't benefitting anymore than Finland is. There are bigger factors that count.

dm319 9y ago
> The very idea that better educated people make better decisions in politics is simply wrong as far as I can see. "Whenever the people are well-informed, they can be trusted with their own government" --Thomas Jefferson But also a country that values education is more likely to value the opinion of an expert, more likely to question a promise or political sound bite. E2E encryption is a good example of the divide between politics and the science. I'm not saying that the computer scientists have the answer here, but ignoring what they say is not the way to come to a policy that will benefit the country.
- ThomPete 9y ago
  Again there is a difference between fundamentals and then optimizations. The point i am trying to make is that it doesent matter whether you are number #1 or #30 what matters is whether your population on average is educated
- humanrebar 9y ago
  Regarding the Jefferson quote, John Adams (surprise!) didn't agree: “Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.” Point being, you'll need more than a Jefferson quote to establish your point that information is sufficient for a competent electorate.
  - dm319 9y ago
    Fair point. However, being well-informed is seen to be important in being able to make a decision in other areas of life (legal system, medical treatment). I agree though that there are cultural differences of opinion on this.
    - ThomPete 9y ago
      Being a expert in Law does not make you an expert in life. Politics is about the life for all of us. Rich and poor, well educated and white trash.
      - dm319 9y ago
        Ok I get your point, and I agree. The vote is for everyone, and everyone is able to assess how happy they are with what is going on. I'm not sure Brexit or Trump are going to do any good for the poorly educated and poor, however. Both were protest / anti-establishment votes, which fell nicely into the hands of the privileged.[1] [1] https://www.ft.com/content/b3d62bcc-7713-11e7-90c0-90a9d1bc9691 https://www.ft.com/content/b3d62bcc-7713-11e7-90c0-90a9d1bc9...
        9y ago

al_chemist 9y ago

> their recent democratic decisions. > for example, has appointed someone with a PhD as minister for science [2], a doctor as minister for health [3] etc etc. You elect ministers in direct elections? Otherwise it's like watching prime minister in a restaurant and announcing "Democracy has decided! We are having chicken risotto tonight!"

dm319 9y ago
No we don't. But if the public do not care for experts, then there is no political incentive to appoint, or listen to, experts.

ChrisjayHenn 9y ago

In regards to your third paragraph, I would posit the opposite causality occurs as well - in a country where academia is seen as an honorable profession for morally upstanding people, people with integrity are more likely to pursue academics, and as a result there are fewer examples of dishonesty by these same experts [1]. Of course, this dynamic can cause a vicious cycle in any field, politics being a common example. [1]https://www.nas.org/articles/Estimated_40_Percent_of_Scientists_Doubt_Manmade_Global_Warming https://www.nas.org/articles/Estimated_40_Percent_of_Scienti...

hoorayimhelping 9y ago

>the USA and UK, and their recent democratic decisions. As long as people (especially educated liberal leaning people) keep framing recent elections as "dumb people elected Trump cause they're dumb," we're going to keep getting Trumps in the elected office. One of the loudest things communicated in the last election in America is that people who don't vote like you are tired of the patronizing, condescending and presumptuous tone. Rather than characterizing the outcome of the last election as "uneducated people elected an asshole", it might do well to understand the concerns of the people who elected him, rather than dismissing them offhand.

dm319 9y ago
I hear this argument a lot. Just because something is inflammatory, doesn't mean it isn't true [1]. It also doesn't mean discussing it will cause it to happen again. It also doesn't mean that we can't also look into the causes and concerns of said people and the vote. Improving education allows people to develop skills for a changing job market, as well as recognise that some promises [2] were suspect from the start. My opinion is that these were two contributing factors to vote result. [1] http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-38762034 http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-38762034 [2] https://www.google.co.uk/amp/www.indy100.com/article/7-brexit-promises-that-have-already-been-abandoned--b1Ne7rGnZDZ%3famp https://www.google.co.uk/amp/www.indy100.com/article/7-brexi...
- ThomPete 9y ago
  Education has far less to do with being educated than the word might allude to. Having a university degree is no guarantee against a stupid electorate.
  - dm319 9y ago
    I totally agree. It's a surrogate marker for something that is much harder to measure.
  - pm90 9y ago
    The thing though is that a university degree does confer some amount of critical thinking on most of its graduates. I'm rather skeptical that every college graduate is guaranteed to be a smart, critical thinking, nuances person. But I do feel comfortable in saying that most are. And even those that aren't, have been exposed to people who are, have created social networks etc. So I don't think being a college educated Republican/Conservative is a contradiction. The difference is the college educated person is more likely to believe in facts and reasoned arguments than appeals to passion, or native tribalism. They are more likely to have more faith in institutions, including democracy. I think its hard for someone who went to college to relate to a person who hasn't been in terms of what kind of effect college has on their lives.