3 ms·
I'd bet more on a literature major from Harvard winning out over a CS major from University of Phoenix. But that's not because of the great value of Harvard's
by SiVal 13y ago
I'd bet more on a literature major from Harvard winning out over a CS major from University of Phoenix.
But that's not because of the great value of Harvard's teaching; it's because of what the two of them did in high school that got one into Harvard and the other into UP. It's not as though the two of started out equivalent at time of graduation but the benefit of $160,000 worth of Marxist post-whatever hogwash training turned the Harvard kid into a real-world champion. After being the kind of person who could fight his way into Harvard to begin with, then spending four years socially integrating with the children of the rich, smart, and powerful, then getting to walk away with a Harvard diploma and his contacts list, he could have majored in Sustainable Shoe Repair and he'd be no less prepared for success than with most non-STEM majors.
But for the kids who aren't qualified for entry into an elite university, what they major in (at least for a terminal degree) will matter more.
Indeed, the abundance of liberal arts majors is probably an indicator of a quality institution.
Well, yes, it's an indication that the more prestigious the institution, the less what they learn in class matters.
- morgante 13y agoI do think the liberal arts teach you something. Critical reasoning matters. So even if the actual content of what you learned is irrelevant, the way you learned it is helpful by teaching you to be a good thinker. For example, a lot of philosophers make great programmers. Not because they specifically learned important things in philosophy, but because they know how to think logically.
- SiVal 13y agoI'm with you regarding the importance of careful reasoning. I'll just say that I'm skeptical of the usefulness in the development of that faculty of classes where the quality of your "reasoning" is considered commensurate with your apparent support of the teacher's political agenda. Compared to classes where the quality of your reasoning is judged by whether the things you design actually work or your opinions are confirmed or refuted by voltmeter, critical thinking as a synonym for compliance with authority is not my idea of the kind of critical reasoning that matters. I'm more impressed by the critical thinking in the physics department than the philosophy department, but departments like philosophy and law are way ahead of the pure activist studies departments, because they tend to genuinely reason about issues from multiple perspectives, not just proselytize the approved one.
- eitally 13y agoThe key difference, though, is that arts & humanities classes force students to cultivate written and [hopefully] verbal communications skills in addition to critical thinking... not to mention reading. I think you vastly overestimate the amount of sway personal politics has over students, or how much faculty discuss/care about politics in the context of their teaching.
- morgante 13y ago> I'm more impressed by the critical thinking in the physics department than the philosophy department, but departments like philosophy and law are way ahead of the pure activist studies departments, because they tend to genuinely reason about issues from multiple perspectives, not just proselytize the approved one. Eh? I'm not sure what your college experience is based on, but I don't even know what you mean by "activist studies" departments. Most humanities classes don't even touch contemporary politics, and I couldn't even guess the political leanings of (for example) my literature professor. I'd probably agree with your criticism when it comes to, say, gender studies. But the majority of liberal arts classes don't involve the "teacher's political agenda." In my experience, it's extremely possible to do well while completely disagreeing with the professor as long as your argument is well-reasoned and articulate.