>"Working this way through 20-30 subjects, as what you would get in the course of a degree, is for mostly psychological reasons close to impossible" You're tru

>"Working this way through 20-30 subjects, as what you would get in the course of a degree, is for mostly psychological reasons close to impossible" You're truly of the opinion that the parent comment, particularly the above portion, doesn't strongly imply that the process of obtaining a degree increases your ability to learn? I'm honestly curious, because that's the tone I personally perceived from the comment. >He said that the process of studying in an academic setting has some benefits especially since the curriculum is often designed to give a broad coverage on many important subjects. Totally agree with this; the diversity in curriculum, human interaction, industry connections, and most importantly the ability to interface with peers in your field are all hugely important. I think University is great for most people, but I don't think people choosing a different route should be considered prone to being underskilled and overconfident unless proven otherwise. >That does not in any way imply that some could learn well on their own as you have experienced. As I stated previously I think the fastest way to learn/improve is through interacting with peers, especially those more educated in the subject matter than myself. It's mainly for this reason that I find university extremely useful, and irc/mailing-lists/docs even more so. I wouldn't attribute my learning via the internet to myself any more(or less) than I would attribute my learning via lectures to myself. I wouldn't have even made the comment if the parent comment hadn't ended by insinuating that not obtaining a degree makes you more susceptible to Dunning-Kruger and then proceeded to call a 500-word post 'elaborate'.