Hypocrisies in feminism

[niko]

For sure. Obviously some classes usually relate to your chosen career field and thats helpful.

But what percentage of classes you took throughout the course of getting a degree would you say were directly useful to you? Arent you a therapist or something? (Or maybe Im confusing you with a diff poster). Were the mandatory math and english and elective credits you had to pay thousands for of much use when it came time to practice?

Could you have skipped half the course load over that four years and still been equally as prepared?

Yes. But there is something to being willing to do what is asked even if it's not perfectly matched to what you want to do, and especially if it may help and you can't see how. The working world, if you are going to fight tooth and nail every request based on not wanting to waste time, honestly you'll waste a lot of time.

I'd say 25% of what i took was utter shit, about 50% related, and about 25% related in some way that was a stretch. But i had a focused major (accounting) which required a lot of credits in the major. If you are just doing some general major, college can be a enormous waste of resources.

[Myth]

For sure. Obviously some classes usually relate to your chosen career field and thats helpful.

But what percentage of classes you took throughout the course of getting a degree would you say were directly useful to you? Arent you a therapist or something? (Or maybe Im confusing you with a diff poster). Were the mandatory math and english and elective credits you had to pay thousands for of much use when it came time to practice?

Could you have skipped half the course load over that four years and still been equally as prepared?

You are thinking of the correct poster. Math and English were definitely useful. I have to do a lot of writing for work, so being able to write professionally is important for many reasons. I went further in math than I needed to (Calc 2) because I originally was looking at a bio major. Even though I didn't need to go that far, I definitely need math for statistics in my line of work. If I went the research route, I would have needed it more, but I do still need it for interpreting research findings.

My art credits were unnecessary, but I don't regret taking them for the sake of being able to create some nice shit for fun. My poly sci classes were unnecessary, but it helped me have at least somewhat of a better idea of US politics. Bio in hindsight was unnecessary since I changed majors, by it is again nice having some above basic knowledge of how the world works. So, yeah, I took some classes that don't directly impact me or my career, but I appreciate knowledge.

I view it like Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs. If you go to college and don't get from it what you need for a job, and thus income for food, home, family, etc, you will likely come away from it pretty pissed and feel you have wasted your time. If you are like me and got from college what you needed, then you can also appreciate the side classes you took and achieve the top of Maslow's hierarchy, self-actualization.

[RidonKs]

thread should be called "hypocrisies in nick young" or better yet "hypocrisies in everyone"

[Nick Young]

thread should be called "hypocrisies in nick young" or better yet "hypocrisies in everyone"

Dawg, do female professional tennis players deserve to be payed the same as males, despite playing two sets less per match and drawing in less TV ratings and less money in terms of ticket sales?

[Nick Young]

You are thinking of the correct poster. Math and English were definitely useful. I have to do a lot of writing for work, so being able to write professionally is important for many reasons. I went further in math than I needed to (Calc 2) because I originally was looking at a bio major. Even though I didn't need to go that far, I definitely need math for statistics in my line of work. If I went the research route, I would have needed it more, but I do still need it for interpreting research findings.

My art credits were unnecessary, but I don't regret taking them for the sake of being able to create some nice shit for fun. My poly sci classes were unnecessary, but it helped me have at least somewhat of a better idea of US politics. Bio in hindsight was unnecessary since I changed majors, by it is again nice having some above basic knowledge of how the world works. So, yeah, I took some classes that don't directly impact me or my career, but I appreciate knowledge.

I view it like Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs. If you go to college and don't get from it what you need for a job, and thus income for food, home, family, etc, you will likely come away from it pretty pissed and feel you have wasted your time. If you are like me and got from college what you needed, then you can also appreciate the side classes you took and achieve the top of Maslow's hierarchy, self-actualization.

do you think you learned things in these classes that you couldn't have learned if you had decided to take the initiative and do the research for yourself?

Universities back in the day encouraged genuine academic study. Now it's just all about hoop jumping.

[Nanners]

I originally said this several months ago, but i think this is a good opportunity to repeat myself -

The value of a college education is not simply the ability to get a good job in a STEM field. Many classes like Philosophy and Literature are considered to be "useless" because you cant use them to get a job, but that is losing sight of the entire point of education in the first place. College was never about getting a job historically, it was about improving your intellectual capabilities. One of the most important skills you aquire at college is the ability to think logically and critically, to form rational thoughts and coherent arguments that stand up in the face of criticism, and these abilities are honed during these "useless" liberal arts classes like Philosophy.

Take a look at the two posters in this thread who have been talking about the uselessness of college, think about the previous posts you have read from these two clowns on this website. Neither of them have any ability to think critically or form rational arguments. They would both benefit tremendously from a well rounded college education.

[niko]

Dawg, do female professional tennis players deserve to be payed the same as males, despite playing two sets less per match and drawing in less TV ratings and less money in terms of ticket sales?

Depends how much they bring in. I think you picked a terrible example, plenty of times in history the women have easily outdrew the men. I get your point but wrong example. There are like 100 sports examples better than that.

Good example is that Mone girl. People were arguing she'd "open up baseball for women". What? Baseball will let anyone play IF YOU CAN PLAY. Women can;t, not at that level. But people were arguing that no women played due to sexism!

[Akrazotile]

do you think you learned things in these classes that you couldn't have learned if you had decided to take the initiative and do the research for yourself?

Universities back in the day encouraged genuine academic study. Now it's just all about hoop jumping.

^ This sums it up nicely.


Nobody (in this thread) is discouraging learning. My point is that millions of kids are going into debt bc they buy education in a sellers market when they could achieve the same result going to the library for free. They think they "have to" go to college automatically or there is no hope for them ever making a decent income. Its become this ingrained mindset that nobody even questions anymore. Its a fallacy. The actual value of college tuition has become grossly over-inflated.

[Nanners]

^ This sums it up nicely.


Nobody (in this thread) is discouraging learning. My point is that millions of kids are going into debt bc they buy education in a sellers market when they could achieve the same result going to the library for free. They think they "have to" go to college automatically or there is no hope for them ever making a decent income. Its become this ingrained mindset that nobody even questions anymore. Its a fallacy. The actual value of college tuition has become grossly over-inflated.

if you really think you can achieve the same result by simply reading books at the library as you get taking classes where you have group discussions and receive feedback on your thoughts from an expert in the field.... well, its not hard to see why you had to drop out of OSU

[Jailblazers7]

^ This sums it up nicely.


Nobody (in this thread) is discouraging learning. My point is that millions of kids are going into debt bc they buy education in a sellers market when they could achieve the same result going to the library for free. They think they "have to" go to college automatically or there is no hope for them ever making a decent income. The actual value of college tuition has become grossly over-inflated.

Sure, my university experience involved a lot of hoop jumping but I also learned a lot of great things in literature, psychology, philosophy, etc that I'd have a much more difficult time doing on my own. Having access to quality teachers and a group of peers also interested in learning/discussing diverse subjects was invaluable to me during my college years. You can learn a lot on your own but being an autodidact is a genuine talent that many lack.

[Nick Young]

I originally said this several months ago, but i think this is a good opportunity to repeat myself -

The value of a college education is not simply the ability to get a good job in a STEM field. Many classes like Philosophy and Literature are considered to be "useless" because you cant use them to get a job, but that is losing sight of the entire point of education in the first place. College was never about getting a job historically, it was about improving your intellectual capabilities. One of the most important skills you aquire at college is the ability to think logically and critically, to form rational thoughts and coherent arguments that stand up in the face of criticism, and these abilities are honed during these "useless" liberal arts classes like Philosophy.

Take a look at the two posters in this thread who have been talking about the uselessness of college, think about the previous posts you have read from these two clowns on this website. Neither of them have any ability to think critically or form rational arguments. They would both benefit tremendously from a well rounded college education.

What is stopping you from reading books on your own, and researching new books on the internet and then reading them? Why do you need to go to university to have them tell you what books you should read, and how you should read them? If people are truly interested in something, they won't need a uni professor to tell them to do it.

[Nanners]

What is stopping you from reading books on your own, and researching new books on the internet and then reading them? Why do you need to go to university to have them tell you what books you should read, and how you should read them? If people are truly interested in something, they won't need a uni professor to tell them to do it.

some things you cant learn by just reading a book. for example, you wont learn to think critically by simply reading a book on philosophy.

[Nick Young]

if you really think you can achieve the same result by simply reading books at the library as you get taking classes where you have group discussions and receive feedback on your thoughts from an expert in the field.... well, its not hard to see why you had to drop out of OSU

What's stopping you from talking about things with your friends? Why is talking to random ass kids in university more valuable then talking to normal kids who aren't in university? What's stopping anyone from doing this?

Why do they need to be forced by their teacher and threatened with failure before they actually pick up a book in the subject they apparently love so much?

[Nanners]

What's stopping you from talking about things with your friends? Why is talking to random ass kids in university more valuable then talking to normal kids who aren't in university? What's stopping anyone from doing this?

nothing is stopping you from doing this, this is a great thing to do. but its still not a good substitute for school.

Why do they need to be forced by their teacher and threatened with failure before they actually pick up a book in the subject they apparently love so much?

is this sentence supposed to make sense? thank you for proving my point about how a college education is important in helping people form rational and coherent arguments. nobody is "forced" to go to college.

[Nick Young]

some things you cant learn by just reading a book. for example, you wont learn to think critically by simply reading a book on philosophy.

You learn ho to think critically by having problems put in front of you, and solving them. That is why apprenticeships are more useful then university educations. In apprenticeships you actually DO THINGS. In university, you just learn the theory in how to do things, WITHOUT ACTUALLY DOING THINGS.

And still there is this snobbery out there in the general population that apprenticeships are for idiots, and university education is for the intellectually elite.

Glad that many US employers are starting to hire apprentices ahead of uni graduates, even in fields like engineering. Not because the apprentice accepts a cut rate price, but because the apprentice has not only theoretical knowledge, but also EXPERIENCE with problem solving. That's the problem with university. Too much theorycrafting does nothing but create a bunch of lazy conceptualists.

If everyone has a degree, a degree doesn't mean shit. And sadly, university level education HAS GOTTEN EASIER over the years, to accommodate all the stupid people being let in to college now who would not have been accepted in the past but are now given state sponsored scholarships.