4 September 2004


A wonderful article from P. Z. Myers defending a liberal arts education (damn straight!) from a critical article that appeared in the recent issue of The Chronicle of Higher Education. The criticism is ... Neanderthalish. At best. It's gotta be a joke written by someone who is just setting up an idiotic counter-example to be easily torn down. Or maybe not.

I thought taking English meant improving my writing skills, that taking Spanish meant that when I went to Mexico I’d be able to converse, that studying history would be an exercise in learning about the past. Wrong on all three counts!


I've said this before. I've said it many times. Here goes again: I got the education I wanted by taking the subjects I was interested in. I love art. I love music. I knew it wasn't going to lead to Big Bucks, but you have to decide for yourself what you value more: sanity or money--and I think that even the people who answer "money" know deep down that it's not true. Go to college to learn what you love.

Myers, a biology teacher, takes his defense personally but doesn't get too unreasonably irate (Urge to kill rising! Must soothe self with favorite quotes…) at the original article's obvious college-should-teach-people-to-be-office-workers approach. The article's prescription for colleges to teach more teamwork and dependability is unbelievable and unbelievably short-sighted. Why not just send kids to a corporate retreat for team-building?

[ found via Musical Perceptions -> Pharyngula ]

[ posted by sstrader on 4 September 2004 at 4:00:00 PM in Culture & Society ]