2 ms·
There’s some truth in the “obviously” part of what you say, but it’s important to note that it’s both the degree and the institution that can be of variable wor
by gorgoiler 2y ago
There’s some truth in the “obviously” part of what you say, but it’s important to note that it’s both the degree and the institution that can be of variable worth.
Every so often, politicians re-invent the facile idea that Art degree bad, BioTech degree good but it’s the long tail of junk Universities that are the real problem.
I know someone from Goldman Sachs with a degree in Anthropology, a barrister with a degree in Norse History, and a COO with a degree in Sociology*. They have all had extraordinarily high flying careers that are seemingly unrelated to what they read at University until you know they went to Harvard, Oxford, and Cambridge.
Maybe those are too exceptional though? Should we shut down the worst schools, accept that you can study anything at the best schools, and then insist that everyone in the middle study only Economically Important, vocational subjects decreed to be Of Use by the technocrats? Seems a bit bleak.
*Gender Studies, no less, a favourite punching bag of the ignorant.
- bluefirebrand 2y ago> They have all had extraordinarily high flying careers that are seemingly unrelated to what they read at University until you know they went to Harvard, Oxford, and Cambridge Yes while were at it, we should somehow address the nepotism network effect of universities There's something very sick in pretending the value of the degree or the institution is related to success when it's really just how much those things let you access people connected to capital Especially since you have to have access to capital to even attend such schools, with few exceptions
- novok 2y agoThose people got there because their undergrad topic had nothing to do with it. It was their general intelligence, aptitudes and connections.