3 ms·

> University is not vocational training. University started out as a trade school for the clergy, then added law and medicine, and then became a finishing scho

> University is not vocational training. University started out as a trade school for the clergy, then added law and medicine, and then became a finishing school. At all points the median student was more interested in drinking than studying. Scholarship has always been a minority pursuit at universities and research universities haven’t even existed for 300 years. Universities are now and always have been vocational institutions. The supply of idle rich who don’t need a job has never been all that high.

onethought 5y ago
... I'm not sure anything you said is true. Unless I'm misunderstanding you. See Cambridge as a counter example of everything you said: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/University_of_Cambridge https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/University_of_Cambridge
- exdsq 5y ago
  I've found that for topics like this, the vast majority of Hacker News thinks the world began in 1776. Saying this, the Universities of Oxford and Paris do meet GPs argument - there were heavily theologian until fairly recently. Cambridge was too until the 16th century.
  - barry-cotter 5y ago
    Also Bologna, the oldest and first university in Christendom. Notice that all of the subjects studied are either vocational, i.e. they lead to jobs, or the liberal arts, which are a prerequisite for studying theology. > The university arose around mutual aid societies (known as universitates scholarium) of foreign students called "nations" (as they were grouped by nationality) for protection against city laws which imposed collective punishment on foreigners for the crimes and debts of their countrymen. These students then hired scholars from the city's pre-existing lay and ecclesiastical schools to teach them subjects such as liberal arts, notarial law, theology, and ars dictaminis (scrivenery).[17] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/University_of_Bologna https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/University_of_Bologna
arcturus17 5y ago
In more mundane terms, the fact that you go to university to get a good job has been the social contract pretty much everywhere in the world in the 20th/21st centuries. The idea that this is “not what it was meant for” which is oft repeated on HN - and I presume in academic circles too - is not only inaccurate as you point out, but also arguably irrelevant, because the people paying the bills and justifying its existence expect otherwise.
- thaumasiotes 5y ago
  > the fact that you go to university to get a good job has been the social contract pretty much everywhere in the world in the 20th/21st centuries. It's an idea from the middle of the 20th century. For much of the 20th century, university was just something you did if you were upper class. Then someone noticed that upper-class people had good jobs and decided that must be due to their university attendance. It wasn't.
roenxi 5y ago
The clergy weren't a vocational body, they were a club. And wars were fought over whether the people in that club had to go to university to be able to join. Ditto the lawyers, who certainly don't need to go to university to read law or argue. Being a lawyer is also basically being in a special club. Medicine, I can only see a vocational aspect. But that is only 1 in 3. > At all points the median student was more interested in drinking than studying. A good use to time in the club. But only relatively rich students can afford to do this. Anyone who drinks their way through a university experience is either rich or busy trying to join a club.

onethought 5y ago

... I'm not sure anything you said is true. Unless I'm misunderstanding you. See Cambridge as a counter example of everything you said: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/University_of_Cambridge https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/University_of_Cambridge

exdsq 5y ago
I've found that for topics like this, the vast majority of Hacker News thinks the world began in 1776. Saying this, the Universities of Oxford and Paris do meet GPs argument - there were heavily theologian until fairly recently. Cambridge was too until the 16th century.
- barry-cotter 5y ago
  Also Bologna, the oldest and first university in Christendom. Notice that all of the subjects studied are either vocational, i.e. they lead to jobs, or the liberal arts, which are a prerequisite for studying theology. > The university arose around mutual aid societies (known as universitates scholarium) of foreign students called "nations" (as they were grouped by nationality) for protection against city laws which imposed collective punishment on foreigners for the crimes and debts of their countrymen. These students then hired scholars from the city's pre-existing lay and ecclesiastical schools to teach them subjects such as liberal arts, notarial law, theology, and ars dictaminis (scrivenery).[17] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/University_of_Bologna https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/University_of_Bologna

arcturus17 5y ago

In more mundane terms, the fact that you go to university to get a good job has been the social contract pretty much everywhere in the world in the 20th/21st centuries. The idea that this is “not what it was meant for” which is oft repeated on HN - and I presume in academic circles too - is not only inaccurate as you point out, but also arguably irrelevant, because the people paying the bills and justifying its existence expect otherwise.

thaumasiotes 5y ago
> the fact that you go to university to get a good job has been the social contract pretty much everywhere in the world in the 20th/21st centuries. It's an idea from the middle of the 20th century. For much of the 20th century, university was just something you did if you were upper class. Then someone noticed that upper-class people had good jobs and decided that must be due to their university attendance. It wasn't.

roenxi 5y ago

The clergy weren't a vocational body, they were a club. And wars were fought over whether the people in that club had to go to university to be able to join. Ditto the lawyers, who certainly don't need to go to university to read law or argue. Being a lawyer is also basically being in a special club. Medicine, I can only see a vocational aspect. But that is only 1 in 3. > At all points the median student was more interested in drinking than studying. A good use to time in the club. But only relatively rich students can afford to do this. Anyone who drinks their way through a university experience is either rich or busy trying to join a club.