Poll: The Liberal Arts and You; The Importance of the Liberal Arts in the Modern World

[bdcjacko]

Everyone I know that has a liberal arts degree is working the same level job they had in high school. I mean I could read before college, I do see the point in going into a program that teaches me how to read more better than before. I wanted to learn how to do something that would get me a job. That is why I'm an accountant with average grades and my brother is a sandwich maker with good grades and an english major.

And I'm superman.
Claims are easy to make.

I don't follow...are you saying my claims of being an accountant are fictitious?

Unless you're willing to substantiate them, I'm saying they're irrelevant.
And I very much doubt you're willing to give a name, work address and photograph to prove you are.

On my profile, you can link to my facebook page which has all the information. Plus being an accountant isn't a very luxurious lie to tell.

 

[Bara_no_Hime]

Liberal arts as a separate field of study for me is fucking retarded, it's essentially getting a degree in wankery. The liberal arts themselves, sociology, philosophy, critical thought, history, English, etc. Are important, but they shouldn't be taught in colleges, they should be taught in fucking primary school. I guess that opinion is why I see a liberal arts degree as a degree in shit you should already know, but meh maybe I expect too much of people.

You expect people in grade school to be able to understand philosophy? Really?

For that matter, you expect grade schoolers to be able to understand literature in any sort of subtle way (ie, beyond basic plot and characters)?

Hell, I was still learning new and interesting things about stories I'd read years before in Grad school.

Most liberal arts don't make sense until you have enough basics and life experience - and hell, have read and analyzed enough literature - to understand the deeper meanings to things. That takes years of practice.

Primary school... really? Primary school is the time to teach math, science, and history - stuff that you don't actually have to think about (at the basic levels - obviously algebra, physics, and a true understanding of history take quite a bit of thought) beyond memorizing a few numbers and patterns.

 

[Lord Beautiful]

As a rule, I think liberal arts studies and liberal arts students are mostly worthless.

That being said, my degree is in education. Education is a field of liberal arts. I'm a little torn.

Erm, well, as is pretty obvious, I'd have to disagree on the first bit. I think liberal arts might require one to be a little more creative and think harder to achieve something, but ease isn't really always the goal. Or I'd hope not!

I'll make sure to tell all of the budding particle physicists to quit their degree program because studying liberal arts will make you "think harder"...

I must be an imbecile for finding my physics classwork to be rather difficult. Or perhaps I'm a genius because sociology was mind-numbingly stupid and probably the easiest 'A' I've made so far in uni.

Truly liberal arts is my calling. As a liberal arts grad, I'd be far more of a contributor to society than as a lowly physicist.

To clarify, my sarcasm is not directed at you, dearly quoted user, but rather following the same vein of your sarcasm. Good day.

 

[brazuca]

However, after reading a lot on the topic, and talking to quite a few people involved both in education and business, I've found that this superficially impractical group of studies is in fact deeply rooted in the fabric of what we call society.

Firstly, thanks for looking, talking and recognising the balance of both sides! What is people's flag-waving obsession with the need to cry out 'art/science trumps all!!!' when this fanatical crusade for superiority of one field over the other doesn't take place in responsible academia. The telling reliance on examples of 'products' in these sort of debates reflect a wider endemic attempt to commit the cardinal sin of both fields - confusing cause and effect.

Poems, vaccines, novels, great feats of enginnering, etc. are only the end result of great inventors, artists, discoverers and creators. Anyone who does their homework into the lives of Blaise Pascal, George Mendel, Francis Bacon, Georges Seurat, Jules Verne, Ray Brabury etc.- great men (and women) throughout Art and Science history, will see that they recognised and embodied the inherrent qualities of both fields and saw no need to trumpet one field over the other.

Why? Because they recognised that both fields hold equal right to being manifest expressions of Man's imagination. Does the author who predicts the use of fibre optic cameras assault the drive and motivation of the naturalist who's bird drawings line the walls of the Natural History Museum? The wider academic community acknowledges and reflects this belief in a shared root and quality of purpose - a fact reflected in the name of one of the highest academic qualifications (shared across both fields), the PhD ('Doctor of Philosophy'). So can we stop with this inane 'our side did this, this and this and implies us better than you' that DOES NOT OCCUR in responsible academia, get off our high horses and go like this gentleman above did and learn something new, challenging and, God forbid, alternative about a field you've been bashing away at out of complete ignorance for that subject's impact on the key figures within your own 'beloved' field.

For the record, I'm in my final year of a 'Mathematics and English' bachelors. Am looking to go into Theatre Administration long-term; volunteer work so far (which has taken me as far as Canada), it's a start and I'm loving it.

Nice post! You know most of this discussions began 'cos of an ideology called positivism. Some hardly see how positivist we became through the XX century. You all can look over the internet and you should check out history of university. It explain a lot of our view (western view) of knowledge.
Now for the most certain concern, liberal arts. You know this change from country to country. In Latin America for example History belongs to social science (in the same way as Law). Epistemology is complicated. Also Liberal Arts as tough in the US has been a great exponation. America gave birth to great social scientist and authors. What happens tough is that to whom interest guys and gals getting that degree. If you think for a second engineering had become over valued as our society needs to much products to manufacture.

Just see in politician speechs and big companies CEO. They keep telling us that they will invent the next big thing, time after time. Liberal Arts degree do not make you invent a product, also makes you reflect on society too much (in the human condition). A thing no governant wants you too.

 

[Dunvi]

Okay, perhaps I count as biased here, but hear me out.

The liberal arts are important. The liberal arts are about teaching how to think, and how to access a wide variety of knowledge across a wide spectrum of fields regardless of your abilities and preferences.

I believe a thorough grounding in the liberal arts is a necessity for anyone in a professional field because no matter how much you try, there's more in your life and even your job than just the act of the job itself. The liberal arts teach you this. Don't get me wrong. I'm a training engineer, and if I weren't going into a STEM field, I'd be going into music (and the highest levels of music and art are not liberal arts fields. The same as how a chemistry degree from standard liberal arts college here is not the same as a chemistry degree from a STEM focused school). However, I still believe in the liberal arts.

I'm going to be an engineer, but that doesn't mean I get to sit around and be all engineer like at all times. I have to interact with people, network, get jobs. I need to communicate with my clients, with my superiors, with the public, with the news, with all sorts of people. I need to know the background of a thousand different things that I might encounter - how many disasters have been caused by people not knowing something because it was "out of their field"? How many problems have been caused by technical fields not knowing how to communicate (coughMMRvaccinetoautismcough)?

I'm going to a STEM school with a heavy, heavy emphasis on the liberal arts, and the facts are there for anyone to see - we have some of the highest salaries, the best jobs, the most successful alumni. Graduate schools like us, because perhaps our students come to them with less specialized knowledge, but pick it all up in seconds, and then start moving ahead of the students without the background that we get. Liberal arts teach you how to think, everything else is about what to do with that knowledge.

I won't deny, however, that there's way too many people aimlessly learning "how to think" and not doing anything with it. Also I won't deny that to some extent, the energy we put into the liberal arts in college should be appearing in high school, except for the part where the US fails at public education.

 

[IndianaJonny]

wait primary school's like high school right?

Not quite. 'Primary' schools in the UK cater for ages 5-10 (equivalent to 'elementary' school, I believe) whereas 'secondary' schools cater for 11-16(occasionally up to 18) in line with American 'high' schools. Does that help?

 

[Bara_no_Hime]

wait primary school's like high school right?

I thought primary school was grade school - you know, K-5 or so, depending on district. I'm imagining 7 year olds reading Decartes. ^^;;

High school is slightly better, but even then, people really aren't that good at theme. I teach English at a university now, but in High school I had difficulties telling the difference between 'theme' and 'plot' - and I was in the advanced English class.

Edit: Yes, American public schools suck. **sigh** My job is basically to teach incoming students all the crap they were supposed to learn in high school, but didn't.

 

[IvoryTowerGamer]

All the petty arguing that people do over this is pretty silly. The higher you go up in either science or liberal arts, the more they resemble each other.

I don't believe you must take liberal arts courses to be well adjusted and have a wide view of the world.

This is true, although one also doesn't need to take computer science classes in order to produce a mutli-million dollar piece of software.

It certainly helps though.

I would love to comment but I don't think you have been clear enough on what you mean by "liberal arts".

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberal_arts

What I think you are saying and what WIKI says are at odds with each other.

Wikipedia is using the academic definition of the term, whereas the OP is using its colloquial use.

If you're interested in studying it, then sure, take it as an interest.
If you think it actually counts as an academic education? You're in for some depressing disillusionment down the line.

Why don't Liberal Arts degrees count as an academic education?

I'll make sure to tell all of the budding particle physicists to quit their degree program because studying liberal arts will make you "think harder"...

I must be an imbecile for finding my physics classwork to be rather difficult. Or perhaps I'm a genius because sociology was mind-numbingly stupid and probably the easiest 'A' I've made so far in uni.

Truly liberal arts is my calling. As a liberal arts grad, I'd be far more of a contributor to society than as a lowly physicist.

To clarify, my sarcasm is not directed at you, dearly quoted user, but rather following the same vein of your sarcasm. Good day.

Oh, come on, you physics guys are basically only plugging something into an incredibly complex equation, right? Plus, your questions only have one answer to them! Do you know how easy my English final would be if it were like that?! =)

I'm going to a STEM school with a heavy, heavy emphasis on the liberal arts, and the facts are there for anyone to see - we have some of the highest salaries, the best jobs, the most successful alumni. Graduate schools like us, because perhaps our students come to them with less specialized knowledge, but pick it all up in seconds, and then start moving ahead of the students without the background that we get. Liberal arts teach you how to think, everything else is about what to do with that knowledge.

This mirrors what I've seen as well.

 

[Wolfrug]

I like the discussion going on here, aside from a few posts erring on the side of troll. By and large, the Escapist seems to be surprisingly 'liberal artsy' - which is not actually what I expected! That's an aside, however.

As an English major moments from graduating, I'm about to feel the great appreciation that English majors-that-are-not-also-teachers have to look forward to. Not very much, that is. At least languages are marginally more 'useful' than general cultural studies, but that's not really what I've specialized in. Linguistics, not so much. Literature: yes please. Luckily, it shouldn't be impossible for me to get started on my doctoral studies and research soon enough, but I do understand this is not possible for everyone.

What it all boils down to is of course the idea that people in society have to be useful, a sort of instrumentalism. Let's not beat around the bush: this is a question of ideology and economics, of bare-faced capitalism versus 'something else' (I'm not saying socialism - in a communist state liberal arts majors would be up against the wall along with all the lawyers and business school people while plumbers and garbage truck drivers pull the triggers). What's this 'something else'? I'm not sure, exactly, but it seems to me to be some kind of anti-instrumentalist drive. A feeling that people aren't just pieces of a machine who need to 'contribute to society' in a 'meaningful' way: meaningful here simply meaning 'whatever makes the most money so you can use that money to buy our useless crap'. It's definitely contra-capitalism, but we seem to lack an alternative towards which we can turn.

Maybe green, sustainable values? That's how I vote anyway. An end to the constant need for GROWTH, the idea that the moment we haven't made more money than we did last year it means we're in RECESSION AND THE WORLD SHALL END. This of course ties into the way our world is being led into bad places in general by, well, greed. Or maybe the invisible hand. Ladida. Ideology and politics is what this is about, anyway, and unfortunately almost the only ones with a clear enough head to see this seems to be liberal arts majors. If for no other reason than that, we ARE needed, as others here have stated. I'm just afraid that this just isn't going to be good enough - I mean, REALLY: how are you going to turn this into something you can sell, and who is going to buy it, since the only ones interested are unemployed JUST LIKE YOU, YOU LIBERAL ARTS BUM. See the problem?

Ah well. Hippie rant over. I'm glad, anyway, that this thread isn't one of unabashed liberal arts bashing. Peace out!

 

[9NineBreaker9]

and high schoolers are bad at it because no one bothers to teach them shit. I was certainly capable of learning all that stuff, it's not really hard once you find someone to actually fucking teach. god I'm glad I won't be alive in 100 years, the schools will be fucked so bad.

While I agree high schools are bad in their current state and could stand to increase their standards, the notion that you had to "wait" for someone to teach you something strikes me as hilarious. As a high schooler, I went and bought philosophy books because there was no philosophy class - I found something interesting and decided to take my own go at it. The value and reward of self-directed learning is something that a high school can't really impart. (And I'm not expecting students to delve into a physics book and come out with a perfect understanding, but still.)

OT: I'm soon going to be attending a liberal arts school and assume I'll be studying English. Perhaps I never find a lucrative job, but I find exploring more elements of humanity to be more appealing. I don't necessarily want to be an engineer or CEO or what have you - a modest, but wholly satisfying living is of greater worth to me.

And maybe the opinion changes and I want to make a ton of money - I got the official endorsement that says "I can has learnings!"

 

[Vault101]

I read this article on cracked which basically said "if your not doing medicine or engineering or science dont bother going to college its not worth it"

funny thing is though he didnt actaually say what you SHOULD do...

Im In Australia so its a different systm and culture but it just seems hard not to become all cynical and Jaded when people tell you what your interested in is really just a bunch of crap or youre never actually going to amount to anything

I mean its makes you want to say "whats the point of anything?"

 

[Chefodeath]

The Sciences make life
The liberal arts make life interesting

The reason why people often don't view liberal arts as important is because they view the purpose of their existence is to live. To this extent, its obvious that you need the sciences. A wise man once said however "The unexamined life is not worth living."

The point of human existence is to live an interesting and fulfilling life. Society needs both the sciences AND the liberal arts to satisfy this need.

 

[waive]

I read this article on cracked which basically said "if your not doing medicine or engineering or science dont bother going to college its not worth it"

funny thing is though he didnt actaually say what you SHOULD do...

Im In Australia so its a different systm and culture but it just seems hard not to become all cynical and Jaded when people tell you what your interested in is really just a bunch of crap or youre never actually going to amount to anything

I mean its makes you want to say "whats the point of anything?"

I read the same article today. Rather interesting piece.

I'm personally just reading philosophy, writing, and designing stuff on my own time, outside of college. I'd love to learn how to do these things professionally, but not at several thousand dollars a year that I won't be able to pay back.

I'm perfectly happy doing what i'm doing, volunteering, and understanding the human condition on a light enough pay check to survive (the nice part about not being materialistic and essentially owning nothing more then what I can fit on my person).

Truly, we all have an interesting life to lead =)

 

[Kortney]

There are way too many pretentious, smug idiots with their liberal arts degrees that are making coffee at star bucks.

I fail to see how we are all better off because they were brainwashed in a different way to me.

 

[FalloutJack]

Hi, I'm a graduate. Guess what territory I was in.

A Liberal Arts form of education is when that may, in fact, be more wide and varied in its content. A very important thing I learned in my road to a Bachelor's Degree is how many other majors - nearly all of them - were so inundated with requirement courses that you couldn't branch out very much and take things of your interest that weren't associated with your major.

As my aim was to be a writer, and focusing on fiction, my work was focused on various English courses. English Comp, English Writing, English Literature, and variations on that theme. However, because I was not an english major by title, I was able to augment my writing prowess with philosophy courses, which were both interesting and challenging. This worked out especially well when you consider not all english courses being taught at a given time were relevent to my interests.

My personal philosophy for life if that in order to do a thing and accel at a thing - in both capability and desire - you have to want to pursue that thing...and enjoy it. A job you are skilled at is far more likely to succeed if you're into it, devoted to it. I pursued what I wanted, which was an expansion in writing and of the mind. They delivered, and I am satisfied with how things turned out.

...especially since my older brother hasn't gotten through college YET!

 

[Nickolai77]

History and International Relations student here:

One of the many things that humanities do is teach you how to communicate. I can gather dozens of sources of information together and organise them into a coherent argument. I can argue a point of view verbally in a seminar, i can read through and take in pages and pages of information, being rationally selective of what information i need and what i don't need. I can write eloquently when needs be, i can write persuasively using rhetorical techniques, and i can apply such techniques when talking to other people.

I remember writing a personal statement to back up my application for university. I handed in the first completed draft of my statement and my tutor was very impressed. My other friends, whom were mostly science students, were made to re-draft and re-draft again their personal statements because their tutors were not happy with them. When i got to university one of my history lectures told us that a history degree is synonymous with a communications degree- and i think he's right.

But among other things, humanities helps you to think critically and analytically. Not only when it comes to examining someone's argument and looking for flaws in it that you can exploit, but also in how you become increasingly self-critical of your own work and ensuring that your own argument is solidly backed up by evidence. This process of critical thinking, especially in subjects like philosophy, engages the brain in some highly complex cognitive thought.

Science is largely about knowing facts- how to work formulas, how to do x y and z in a lab, what various particles do and the functions of cells etc. Now, from what i know science students may be sometimes expected to argue a case, but the greater emphasis is however just about knowledge. In humanities, you've got to do both to equal measure. You may, for instance, have to know what the socio-economic affects of the Black Death were, but also argue wherever you agree or not with the notion that these affects are related to, say, the Reformation. The knowledge that science teaches it's students is indeed however more useful. Knowing how certain particles behave in cold air or underwater say is useful to many people whom want to manufacture products. However, whilst the knowledge humanities teaches may have fewer practical applications, we have to do more with that knowledge than science students.

Finally, as has already been hinted at. I think there is some truth behind the idea that studying humanities does improve yourself as a person. For me, studying history has given me a vivid sense of identity and place and the processes in the past which have shaped today. I see things today, like the names of towns on roadsides, or the stars in the sky above, and i can "see" things in my minds eye that only people in the past believed. Personally, i find it very fulfilling. At 6th form college, along with history, i also studied philosophy (which i minored in at university) and English literature. I know, roughly, how to think like a philosopher and this gives me a deep insight about myself and life in general. Studying English Literature, and learning about how writers such as Wordsworth, Shakespeare and Hardy expressed themselves helps me in turn express my own creativity. Creative writing is something i enjoy doing in my spare time, and studying literature had aided me in doing this.

Studying humanities has taught me how to communicate, how to think critically, analytically and martial large amounts of information into a structured argument. It can also be immensely fulfilling, it's (metaphorical) food for the soul. Studying science has many practical applications, and is hence useful on it's own merits. I wouldn't like to compare to the two because they do very different (but often related and complimentary) things. One seeks to understand the world, the other seeks to understand humanity. Any society needs both arts and sciences in order to function with any meaning.

 

[similar.squirrel]

..Hum. I'm kind of conflicted on this. In one hand, I recognize the value of a broad humanistic skill-set and a well-informed world-view.
On the other hand, many of the subjects taught over the course of a Liberal Arts programme strike me as the kind of things that one could learn by simply reading a book in their free time.
I should be studying Wildlife Biology next year, which is about as Lib-Artsy as a Science degree can get..

 

[GrizzlerBorno]

I certainly hope not. I'm getting into a Liberal arts College this fall in the Humanities and Sciences school. I realize that they're not as practical as studying Engineering or whatever........ But I personally can't do engineering. I'm not going sit in one place and study a bunch of mechanical, hoo-ha for 4 years because that would drive me fucking insane.

Liberal arts will (hopefully) lead to interesting thought and acquisition of fun knowledge; and practicality be damned, that sounds more fun than wasting your college life toiling through books fat enough to crack a skull.