A Defense of a Liberal Arts Education

[cawacko]

I think questioning established norms is a good thing, I don’t think one needs much of an education to do that.

To know how to evaluate an established norm effectively, a good Westwood help tremendously.

My education is what led me to question established norms.

Do you have an example in mind of an established norm your education helped you question and how you evaluated it maybe differently than someone who doesn’t have your educational background?

 

[cawacko]

Ahh, but you have to remember the sheer stupidity of many of the American electorate that put the likes of Reagan, the Bush crime family and the Orange Oaf in the White House.

They were told that "elitist, intellectual liberals" would destroy the American way (as seen on old b/w television shows like "Father Knows Best", "Leave it to Beaver", "I Love Lucy", etc.) if Republicans weren't voted into office.

Yet who did they vote in? Reagan's working-middle class roots were nullified by his Hollywood status (that kept him out of WWII). The Bush Crime family were wealthy New Englanders via Connecticut, and Dump was born into wealth in New York.

These "elites" convinced their supporters that they would preserve the American dream, keep the n*****s down and put the women folk back in the kitchen where they belong. Damned fools keep slitting their own throats every time they vote.

So it's no wonder that the fools believe whatever they are told. Now, ask them if the GOP is going to increase availability in trade schools and do better funding for public schools.

And the band played on.

Until recent times, Republicans regularly won the vote of college educated voters, and the Democratic base was heavily working class.

Reagan won not only college educated voters he won a majority of voters with advanced degrees.

But I’m missing what any of that has to do with liberal arts. If the most important thing from education is how one vote, I’ve not seen it broken down that those with college degrees that studied liberal arts vote this way compared to those with college degrees who went to business school or compared to those with college that studied stem.

Is the idea that when someone is choosing a major the emphasis will be how do people vote who are in that major?

 

[Jarod]

Do you have an example in mind of an established norm your education helped you question and how you evaluated it maybe differently than someone who doesn’t have your educational background?

Not sure I exactly can, but I will try. Learning ideas from different people that were way beyond anything I experienced in my suburban youth expanded my idea of what was possible. They gave me fastly new ideas of what was possible to evaluate my future with.

Understanding how different systems, monarchy, communism, fascism developed give me a significantly vast or understanding of cause-and-effect, on a much Grander scale than I would have understood before.

Reading about how Henry David Therou rejected his comfortable upper class life in Boston, to live in the woods by himself affected his life, inspired me to try different things to see how others experienced life and greater understand them, additionally inspired me to try different things so I could understand maybe what I wanted out of life.

Learning about different people’s paths showed me that I had opportunities to make choices that would change what seemed like a prescribed path for my life.

When a college girlfriend got a job that required her to travel around Europe, and invited me to join, I accepted, because I knew what such an experience could mean to my life, and that I did not have to keep on the path prescribed to me by my culture and upbringing. Traveling with Cirque de Soleil changed the trajectory of my life. Without my education, I do not believe I would’ve ever stepped off the prescribed path.

 

[Jarod]

Until recent times, Republicans regularly won the vote of college educated voters, and the Democratic base was heavily working class.

Reagan won not only college educated voters he won a majority of voters with advanced degrees.

But I’m missing what any of that has to do with liberal arts. If the most important thing from education is how one vote, I’ve not seen it broken down that those with college degrees that studied liberal arts vote this way compared to those with college degrees who went to business school or compared to those with college that studied stem.

Is the idea that when someone is choosing a major the emphasis will be how do people vote who are in that major?

I don’t think it’s as direct as that. I don’t really know what happened before Reagan, but I know the Republican Party is vastly different today than it was back then.

It’s not the mear act of taking a liberal arts curriculum in college, it’s the active receiving a classical liberal arts education. Those are two different things. Reading the books and receiving the message, studying history and not just learning dates, but concepts and ideas, understanding, political systems, and where the ideas came from and how they affect the communities that choose them or don’t choose them is the education. Like I said not everybody who takes a liberal arts curriculum gets that out of it, but I do believe that’s the most beneficial thing about it.

When I went to college, they were two types of history classes, history is part of a liberal arts education. One type of history class was learning names dates, and who ruled what empire. The other type of history class was about concepts ideas, and how certain systems led to cultural changes. The dates and names type of history class are not what I would call classic liberal arts.

I graduated from the college of liberal arts at Auburn, but I did not write about the traditional liberal arts education I received , because I don’t consider what I got a classical liberal arts education. I wrote about the liberal arts education I got in high school because that was a classical art education.

 

[Jarod]

Do you have an example in mind of an established norm your education helped you question and how you evaluated it maybe differently than someone who doesn’t have your educational background?

Maybe about 1000,, you don’t have to do things the established or “popular way”, that there is rarely anything that is black and white almost everything falls into a scale of Grey. I did not feel I needed to major in some sort of degree that would guarantee money, but every woman I should major in something interesting to me. That I did not feel I needed to graduate college in a four year period. That I did not have to believe that only one religion could be true. That I did not have be friends with a click or a group of people that had something in common with me. That I did not need to be popular. That I did not have to subscribe to the current idea of what is right and wrong. That what mattered to me was not grades, but instead that I learned something valuable. That the established way of doing things was not always the best way.

 

[cawacko]

Not sure I exactly can, but I will try. Learning ideas from different people that were way beyond anything I experienced in my suburban youth expanded my idea of what was possible. They gave me fastly new ideas of what was possible to evaluate my future with.

Understanding how different systems, monarchy, communism, fascism developed give me a significantly vast or understanding of cause-and-effect, on a much Grander scale than I would have understood before.

Reading about how Henry David Therou rejected his comfortable upper class life in Boston, to live in the woods by himself affected his life, inspired me to try different things to see how others experienced life and greater understand them, additionally inspired me to try different things so I could understand maybe what I wanted out of life.

Learning about different people’s paths showed me that I had opportunities to make choices that would change what seemed like a prescribed path for my life.

When a college girlfriend got a job that required her to travel around Europe, and invited me to join, I accepted, because I knew what such an experience could mean to my life, and that I did not have to keep on the path prescribed to me by my culture and upbringing. Traveling with Cirque de Soleil changed the trajectory of my life. Without my education, I do not believe I would’ve ever stepped off the prescribed path.

It's great that your education really helped your journey in life. I guess I'm also thinking of people who come from humble beginnings and didn't get a chance at a liberal arts education, but they still had big dreams and were able to ultimately do amazing things and live great lives.

I'm not knocking education here but I am going back to this idea that a liberal arts background allows you to more effectively challenge established norms. I'm struggling to see it.

 

[cawacko]

I don’t think it’s as direct as that. I don’t really know what happened before Reagan, but I know the Republican Party is vastly different today than it was back then.

It’s not the mear act of taking a liberal arts curriculum in college, it’s the active receiving a classical liberal arts education. Those are two different things. Reading the books and receiving the message, studying history and not just learning dates, but concepts and ideas, understanding, political systems, and where the ideas came from and how they affect the communities that choose them or don’t choose them is the education. Like I said not everybody who takes a liberal arts curriculum gets that out of it, but I do believe that’s the most beneficial thing about it.

When I went to college, they were two types of history classes, history is part of a liberal arts education. One type of history class was learning names dates, and who ruled what empire. The other type of history class was about concepts ideas, and how certain systems led to cultural changes. The dates and names type of history class are not what I would call classic liberal arts.

I graduated from the college of liberal arts at Auburn, but I did not write about the traditional liberal arts education I received , because I don’t consider what I got a classical liberal arts education. I wrote about the liberal arts education I got in high school because that was a classical art education.

When you say “receiving the message”, do you mean understanding and engaging with the ideas? Or do you think there is a particular message someone should take away from them?

 

[cawacko]

Maybe about 1000,, you don’t have to do things the established or “popular way”, that there is rarely anything that is black and white almost everything falls into a scale of Grey. I did not feel I needed to major in some sort of degree that would guarantee money, but every woman I should major in something interesting to me. That I did not feel I needed to graduate college in a four year period. That I did not have to believe that only one religion could be true. That I did not have be friends with a click or a group of people that had something in common with me. That I did not need to be popular. That I did not have to subscribe to the current idea of what is right and wrong. That what mattered to me was not grades, but instead that I learned something valuable. That the established way of doing things was not always the best way.

An established norm in America says the key to a solid middle class (or better) life is going to college after high school. My first thought was does a kid need to get a liberal arts education to challenge that established norm and say maybe I want to go to a trade school, maybe i'll go to the military or be artist or whatever it is?

Using this board as a proxy, there is definitely an attitude of looking down on people who don't go to college. There's an element of irony in that.

 

[Into the Night]

Ahh, but you have to remember the sheer stupidity of many of the American electorate that put the likes of Reagan, the Bush crime family and the Orange Oaf in the White House.

They were told that "elitist, intellectual liberals" would destroy the American way (as seen on old b/w television shows like "Father Knows Best", "Leave it to Beaver", "I Love Lucy", etc.) if Republicans weren't voted into office.

Yet who did they vote in? Reagan's working-middle class roots were nullified by his Hollywood status (that kept him out of WWII). The Bush Crime family were wealthy New Englanders via Connecticut, and Dump was born into wealth in New York.

These "elites" convinced their supporters that they would preserve the American dream, keep the n*****s down and put the women folk back in the kitchen where they belong. Damned fools keep slitting their own throats every time they vote.

So it's no wonder that the fools believe whatever they are told. Now, ask them if the GOP is going to increase availability in trade schools and do better funding for public schools.

And the band played on.

The Dept of Education has not educated a single student. It should be disbanded.
It is DEMOCRATS that think they are The Elite. It is DEMOCRATS that want oligarchy or dicatatorship.
It is DEMOCRATS that ignore the Constitution of the United States and all State constitutions.
It is DEMOCRATS that support rioting, looting, arson, drug abuse, harboring illegal aliens, slavery, and thuggery.
It is DEMOCRATS that are supporting election fraud, welfare fraud, the Industrial Homeless complex and the Industrial Eco complex.
It is DEMOCRATS that ignore history, deny science and mathematics, and try to institute state religions to replace them.
It is DEMOCRATS that caused the economic depressions during Obama/Biden and again during Biden/Obama.
It is DEMOCRATS that caused the Covid Hoax and all the criminal activity surrounding it.
It is DEMOCRATS that hate women by ruining their sporting teams, treating them as pawns when convenient.
It is DEMOCRATS that hate children by aborting them, putting them in 'gun free zones' where mass murders can kill with relative impunity.
It is DEMOCRATS that want endless wars, keeping the wars in Iran going for fifty years, and keeping brutal drug lords as dictators.
It is DEMOCRATS that want to 'tax the wealthy', an unconstitutional act.
It is DEMOCRATS that are socialists, favoring fascism, communism, and slavery; and with it the theft of wealth.
It is DEMOCRATS constantly playing word games, even to the point they no longer understand the English language.
It is DEMOCRATS that support sexual perversions, and constantly strive to force them into the public eye.
It is DEMOCRATS that think TV shows and movies of any era are 'reality'.
It is DEMOCRATS that hate capitalism, the ONLY economic system capable of bring the poor out of poverty and wealth across the nation.

It is DEMOCRATS that deny their own history, their own posts, their own agenda; and try to blame it on someone else.

This is what Democrats are. Though they deny it, they cannot escape what they are, nor the consequences of what they are.

 

[Into the Night]

An established norm in America says the key to a solid middle class (or better) life is going to college after high school. My first thought was does a kid need to get a liberal arts education to challenge that established norm and say maybe I want to go to a trade school, maybe i'll go to the military or be artist or whatever it is?

Using this board as a proxy, there is definitely an attitude of looking down on people who don't go to college. There's an element of irony in that.

This is more class warfare by DEMOCRATS.

 

[Into the Night]

I would disagree with some of that.

Grammar and composition. Being able to read, write, and compose written material well.
Logic
Rhetoric and speaking
Algebra to include geometry. Being able to formulate mathematical equations and work with real world objects.
Statistics. Having an understanding of how to generalize and use data.
Art. Being able to create original works in one or more mediums.
Science and engineering. Having an understanding of how things work. This doesn't have to be a deep understanding but rather a general grasp of these fields.

Statistics is not one of the seven liberal arts.
Neither is art (other than music).
Neither is science or engineering.

As to your list, consider this:

A lot of 'educated people' on JPP today have very poor grammar. They are functionally illiterate.
They deny logic and mathematics.
They are repetitive often playing word games to try to hide it.
They think statistical math is some kind of Holy Prophet (it is not capable of prediction), and quote 'data' that doesn't exist, and quote 'results' that are not results. In other words, they never learned statistical mathematics.
Their modern art has sometimes been compared to salt licks or BBQ pits. It's lousy art.
They deny many theories of science as a matter of routine.
They deny engineering and its capabilities and limitations as a matter of routine.

Then they claim to know the 'liberal arts'.

 

[Into the Night]

I would ask them about their experience and then about their degree. Often I asked what they learned from their academic studies besides the topics.

If a position required technical skills, then that is what we looked for. But I also interviewed people for mgmt positions and leadership positions. A degree was required for marketing and other levels at the company.

You never hired anyone other than a contractor to unstop your toilet. You paid him well too.

I run a successful company manufacturing sensors for industrial, aerospace, entertainment, and medical markets.
I hire and fire engineers, programmers, and manufacturing personnel.

I don't give a damn whether they have a degree or not.
My only interest is whether they can do the job.
If they want to work in aerospace, I insist they obtain an FAA mechanic's license. Until then, they can assist a licensed mechanic. That requires no degree.
Some of the best marketing people have no degree whatsoever.
Programming a computer successfully requires no degree.
Building a computer successfully requires no degree.
Even designing a sensor requires no degree.
Managing a team successfully requires no degree.

If they sluff around and don't do the job, they are fired. No degree will save them.

 

[Into the Night]

Until recent times, Republicans regularly won the vote of college educated voters, and the Democratic base was heavily working class.

Reagan won not only college educated voters he won a majority of voters with advanced degrees.

But I’m missing what any of that has to do with liberal arts. If the most important thing from education is how one vote, I’ve not seen it broken down that those with college degrees that studied liberal arts vote this way compared to those with college degrees who went to business school or compared to those with college that studied stem.

Is the idea that when someone is choosing a major the emphasis will be how do people vote who are in that major?

The 'liberal arts' degree in too many schools has nothing to do with the liberal arts.
It's just a useless piece of paper that says you wasted some of your time in college accomplishing very little.

 

[T. A. Gardner]

When it comes to general mathematical knowledge, I tend to divide applicants into two groups, those that know calculus, and those that don't. Calculus is the shibboleth of math. It is not always important, but knowledge of it means that the applicant will almost always know the important stuff.

My huge complaint about liberal arts degrees is they are often, but not always, short on the math.

Then you are an idiot.

Calculus--and I did take and pass it--isn't that useful for roughly 90 to 95% of the population. Trig is a shortcut for geometry if you have a calculator. For everyday use, knowing algebra and statistics is what matters along with some basic geometry (like the 3, 4, 5 rule in carpentry).

Unless you are an engineer, calculus is largely going to go unused. For me, one time I did bother using it was in a (unfinished) paper I did on advance rates in warfare. Unfortunately, I was unable to get anywhere near enough raw data to make the idea validated so I tabled it.

My view is that there are those that can do basic math--maybe. Add, multiply, do fractions. They're basic work skills everyone needs. Algebra and statistics are things supervisors and managers need a good understanding of.

 

[Into the Night]

Maybe about 1000,, you don’t have to do things the established or “popular way”, that there is rarely anything that is black and white almost everything falls into a scale of Grey. I did not feel I needed to major in some sort of degree that would guarantee money, but every woman I should major in something interesting to me. That I did not feel I needed to graduate college in a four year period. That I did not have to believe that only one religion could be true. That I did not have be friends with a click or a group of people that had something in common with me. That I did not need to be popular. That I did not have to subscribe to the current idea of what is right and wrong. That what mattered to me was not grades, but instead that I learned something valuable. That the established way of doing things was not always the best way.

Illiteracy: Wandering topic in sentences. Run-on sentences. Use of noun as verb. Adjective used as conclusion. Capitalization of common noun. Missing comma. Period used for semicolon. Null sentence (just a period).

You have also now claimed that you don't know the difference between right and wrong, so you are illiterate here also.

Seems you have learned absolutely nothing, Pretender.

Your grammar is atrocious.
You don't know the difference between right and wrong.
You are unaware of society norms.
You don't even know what a woman is.

What valuable thing DID you learn? You never described one!

 

[Into the Night]

Then you are an idiot.

Calculus--and I did take and pass it--isn't that useful for roughly 90 to 95% of the population. Trig is a shortcut for geometry if you have a calculator. For everyday use, knowing algebra and statistics is what matters along with some basic geometry (like the 3, 4, 5 rule in carpentry).

The 3, 4, 5 rule is from trigonometry, not geometry.
The sine waves you mess with in your work are all from trigonometry. The generators that cause them are wheels.

Unless you are an engineer, calculus is largely going to go unused.

I find engineers rarely use calculus at all. There are a few exceptions (the speedometer in your car is a differential machine).

For me, one time I did bother using it was in a (unfinished) paper I did on advance rates in warfare. Unfortunately, I was unable to get anywhere near enough raw data to make the idea validated so I tabled it.

Fair enough.

My view is that there are those that can do basic math--maybe. Add, multiply, do fractions. They're basic work skills everyone needs. Algebra and statistics are things supervisors and managers need a good understanding of.

Being an electrician, you use algebra all the time...usually in the form of Ohm's law or in translating written plans to real wiring layouts.
Every competent carpenter I know uses algebra. They are translating written plans to a real building, and accounting for other tradesman to follow after the structure is completed.
Every competent programmer uses algebra. It is incorporated into the programming language he is using.
Every competent plumber uses algebra. He must calculate drop rates on plumbing and capacities (again using Ohm's law), and must also translate written plans to real plumbing systems.
Every competent painter or drywaller uses algebra. It's how they calculate how much paint or drywall to buy.

Algebra requires no degree. Anyone can learn it if they take the time to study it. None of these examples are supervisors or managers.

Statistical math is useful for managers, and is a useful tool in general as a summarizing tool. It has NO power of prediction, however, due to it's use of random numbers.

The interesting thing about calculus is that a lot of people wind up using it, but don't realize they are using it! Estimating the amount of wire you'll need as you use it, for example; estimating how much paint is needed to cover a surface from your experience; etc. Every trade has to account for 'a little slop'. Oddly enough, that's calculus helping you there!

 

[T. A. Gardner]

The 3, 4, 5 rule is from trigonometry, not geometry.
The sine waves you mess with in your work are all from trigonometry. The generators that cause them are wheels.

You're an idiot. The 3,4,5 rule is the Pythagorean theorem. It is from geometry. It's a shortcut using math you can do with a tape measure. 3^2 + 4^2 = 5^2 or 9 + 16 = 25. Any combination with the same ratio works. It's for finding if two walls of a room are square at 90 degrees to each other.

Being an electrician, you use algebra all the time...usually in the form of Ohm's law or in translating written plans to real wiring layouts.

No, usually in the form of laying out conduit bends, box fills, and doing load calculations for panels.

Every competent carpenter I know uses algebra. They are translating written plans to a real building, and accounting for other tradesman to follow after the structure is completed.

Every carpenter I know uses shortcuts and math that can be done on a scrap piece of wood.

Every competent plumber uses algebra. He must calculate drop rates on plumbing and capacities (again using Ohm's law), and must also translate written plans to real plumbing systems.

Competent plumbers use a tape measure or something like this:

To get the grade on a drainpipe correct. Simplicity and speed at getting a right answer are the goal.

Every competent painter or drywaller uses algebra. It's how they calculate how much paint or drywall to buy.

Virtually all painters and drywallers I've ever met or worked with can barely do math. They use shortcuts and trade tricks to get things correct. Putting up drywall with a window opening in the panel. Screw or nail the whole sheet up then go back and cut the window out with an oscillating or stab saw. No math and the fit is perfect.

 

[Jarod]

It's great that your education really helped your journey in life. I guess I'm also thinking of people who come from humble beginnings and didn't get a chance at a liberal arts education, but they still had big dreams and were able to ultimately do amazing things and live great lives.

I'm not knocking education here but I am going back to this idea that a liberal arts background allows you to more effectively challenge established norms. I'm struggling to see it.

I’m sure there are other ways to achieve what I am talking about. I think it’s hard to measure. I really do not think that doing amazing things and having a great life are necessarily the measure of whether you had a great liberal art education. For me, and I have never done anything that people would look at and say, amazing. But it is amazing to me.

I think education is one way to achieve what I’m talking about. Some people seem to be born with it. Some people get it from their family. Some people have an experience in life that opens their mind. Plenty of people who had the same education as me, did not have the same experience.

For me, it made all the difference. Fame, money or accomplishing something amazing is not, to me, a mark of attaining a fulfilled life. In fact, it’s my observation that people who are recognized by our society as having accomplished something amazing, are generally not the happiest people.

 

[Jarod]

An established norm in America says the key to a solid middle class (or better) life is going to college after high school. My first thought was does a kid need to get a liberal arts education to challenge that established norm and say maybe I want to go to a trade school, maybe i'll go to the military or be artist or whatever it is?

Using this board as a proxy, there is definitely an attitude of looking down on people who don't go to college. There's an element of irony in that.

I think there are so many different paths people can used to obtain in life they can feel proud of and happy about. I personally believe that a strong liberal arts education should be available to everyone, it is not.

The public schools do not provide a strong liberal arts, education, and I don’t think most of these state schools do either.

 

[Jarod]

Yeah, in my industry they care about where people go to school but I’ve never heard someone say “I’m specifically looking for someone with a liberal arts background”.

I think most modern employers are looking for productivity, and ability to earn money for the company. That’s not the goal of a liberal art, education, and to me not the measure of anyone’s value to humanity or themselves.