4 ms·

Having a history degree doesn't exactly make you more qualified to be a bartender (going by the example in the article).

by aestra 13y ago

kokey 13y ago
I'm not sure, I think in the UK it's a fairly common assumption that a history degree means you'll most likely be operating a beer tap to pay the bills. This is also useful in most pubs since they are a few centuries old.
- aestra 13y ago
  >in the UK it's a fairly common assumption... This story was about the US. >This is also useful in most pubs since they are a few centuries old. And? I've been to a pub in the US that was 3 centuries old and thought to be the first building in the city (used to be a private residence). The building's history was probably part of the orientation, and it isn't like it is hard to memorize. Having a history degree doesn't make him more qualified to talk about it, it isn't like the history of pubs is included in the undergraduate (or even graduate) curriculum. >assumption that a history degree means you'll most likely be operating a beer tap to pay the bills Yea, a history degree is known to be pretty "useless" to most people who obtain one, that doesn't mean one is more qualified because they have one, it just means there is very little one can do with a history degree.
lotsofmangos 13y ago
Learning history is an end in and of itself though. You don't need to have an application in mind to justify getting a degree.
- danielweber 13y ago
  As consumption -- "I want to know about history" -- it's great. As investment -- "I want a degree to get a better job" -- it may not be good for the individual, and for society it's probably a net negative, because the benefits to your human capital are minimal while you are putting more resources into a zero-sum status competition. Now, it's perfectly okay to have consumption, but you shouldn't confuse it for an investment. Spending 4 years backpacking across Europe also sounds like an awesome time, another end unto itself, but you shouldn't borrow money you don't have to do it.
  - lotsofmangos 13y ago
    Not all returns on investments are financial. Spending money improving the level of history knowledge in a population can have paybacks that range from better national security through to the quality of art. These things are very hard to quantify and to just look on their direct financial return gives a very poor measure.

Having a history degree doesn't exactly make you more qualified to be a bartender (going by the example in the article).

by aestra 13y ago

Having a history degree doesn't exactly make you more qualified to be a bartender (going by the example in the article).

kokey 13y ago

I'm not sure, I think in the UK it's a fairly common assumption that a history degree means you'll most likely be operating a beer tap to pay the bills. This is also useful in most pubs since they are a few centuries old.

aestra 13y ago
>in the UK it's a fairly common assumption... This story was about the US. >This is also useful in most pubs since they are a few centuries old. And? I've been to a pub in the US that was 3 centuries old and thought to be the first building in the city (used to be a private residence). The building's history was probably part of the orientation, and it isn't like it is hard to memorize. Having a history degree doesn't make him more qualified to talk about it, it isn't like the history of pubs is included in the undergraduate (or even graduate) curriculum. >assumption that a history degree means you'll most likely be operating a beer tap to pay the bills Yea, a history degree is known to be pretty "useless" to most people who obtain one, that doesn't mean one is more qualified because they have one, it just means there is very little one can do with a history degree.

lotsofmangos 13y ago

Learning history is an end in and of itself though. You don't need to have an application in mind to justify getting a degree.

danielweber 13y ago
As consumption -- "I want to know about history" -- it's great. As investment -- "I want a degree to get a better job" -- it may not be good for the individual, and for society it's probably a net negative, because the benefits to your human capital are minimal while you are putting more resources into a zero-sum status competition. Now, it's perfectly okay to have consumption, but you shouldn't confuse it for an investment. Spending 4 years backpacking across Europe also sounds like an awesome time, another end unto itself, but you shouldn't borrow money you don't have to do it.
- lotsofmangos 13y ago
  Not all returns on investments are financial. Spending money improving the level of history knowledge in a population can have paybacks that range from better national security through to the quality of art. These things are very hard to quantify and to just look on their direct financial return gives a very poor measure.