College is not necessary - Page 3

On February 18 2009 14:13 benjammin wrote:
if that's not conclusive evidence, i don't know what is

On February 18 2009 13:35 micronesia wrote:
Although technical majors do tend to be more difficult on average, as far as I've seen.

On February 18 2009 14:07 benjammin wrote:


then what makes you so sure that other majors aren't difficult?

On February 18 2009 14:32 benjammin wrote:
anecdotal examples aren't evidence of the difficulty of a major

i am constantly amazed at the arrogance of science majors, but i suppose i'm fighting an unwinnable war on TL

On February 18 2009 13:14 Enrique wrote:
While I'm inclined to agree with your assessment that college isn't necessary--obviously it's not--I pretty adamantly disagree with the way you phrase it as a basic cost-benefit analysis where it's all about how much it costs vs. how much you make to repay said costs.


I realize I'm an idealist and not always the most practical or realistic, but education should be an end unto itself. I think that way too many people view college only as the path to a job. Therein lies my problem though: college is about so much more than that. Higher learning isn't valued for itself, but rather for what it will lead to. College is really the only time in your life that you'll be surrounded by your peer group with free time, without parents, without curfews, with few real, difficult responsibilities. It's a time to learn who you are, and, if you don't know, to try and figure out where your place in the world is--what you want to do. It's a unique and generally great experience that not enough people really take advantage of. (caveat: I do agree that people who mooch and people whose only goals are to party and nail sorority girls typically shouldn't go to college)

I'm not saying it's for everyone, and I suppose I do agree with your general thesis that college isn't necessary, but I also think you sell it a bit short. Now, there are plenty of people that don't have the desire and/or aptitude for college and who lead perfectly good, happy lives without it. Hell, only one other person in my family has graduated with any kind of degree. It's not necessary, but it's a wonderful experience and, if done right, can be absolutely worth it, even if you don't wind up in a field that necessarily pays more than you'd make otherwise.

One other point I'd like to make is that I don't know how everyone is really expected to know what they want to do right after high school. I'm 24 now, and looking at 18 year old students is such a surreal experience. I wouldn't but hardly trust one of them to make a major life decision, let alone choose a career path with any kind of certainty. Of course, just as I might counsel a fairly young person against early marriage because it's likely to fail, there are many exceptions to every rule, and I'm sure there are lots of people that are just such exceptions.

On February 18 2009 14:44 Jibba wrote:
EDIT: It's also worth noting college doesn't have to be that expensive anymore. Most state schools are excellent and fairly cheap, and most places offer credit transfer programs with community colleges so you're only paying for university for two years.

On February 18 2009 14:32 benjammin wrote:
anecdotal examples aren't evidence of the difficulty of a major

i am constantly amazed at the arrogance of science majors, but i suppose i'm fighting an unwinnable war on TL

On February 18 2009 14:44 Jibba wrote:

The social sciences are always insecure about criticism from the "hard" sciences but when you truly apply yourself, both are incredibly hard. That said, you can (and many people do) half ass their way to a 3.0+ GPA in social sciences, like LosingID8's anthro friend, especially because the first two years aren't particularly difficult. That still doesn't mean his friend is actually worth a damn as an anthropologist and without a decent paper to his name he probably won't get into a decent grad school. As someone who actually does all his readings because I want to be good at what I do in the future, I can tell you that I do not get free time like that, and I'm a relatively fast reader.

Any idiot can read the Communist Manifesto and understand Marx's general criticisms. Not everyone can read Das Kapital and have any idea what he was talking about. Not everyone can learn 6+ languages like most Ottoman scholars in order to do primary historical research and apply it to social theories.

And in the past 40 years, there has been a major shift to use mathematics and formal modeling in the social sciences, although the quality of its findings is questionable.

EDIT: It's also worth noting college doesn't have to be that expensive anymore. Most state schools are excellent and fairly cheap, and most places offer credit transfer programs with community colleges so you're only paying for university for two years.

On February 18 2009 14:54 LosingID8 wrote:

oh yeah, obviously if someone is extremely dedicated to their field of study and really applies themselves then of course it will be a difficult path of study.

but think of it this way, in order to truly excel in sciences/humanities you need to put forth a crapload of effort.

in order to do well (say a 3.5) in sciences you have to work your ass off like crazy in both lower and upper divs, whereas in humanities you can get by doing next to nothing in lower divs.

On February 18 2009 15:02 Jibba wrote:
There's definitely a steeper curve, but there's also many more job opportunities for an engineer with a 3.0 GPA than an unremarkable 3.5 sociologist.

By lower divs do you mean the first two years? I started out in engineering school at Purdue and half assed my way through the first year and a half as well. I assume you went to school at 5s on all your APs, so you were taking 200+s as a freshman?