[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/lit/ - Literature

View post   
File: 132 KB, 1280x720, 1442437872429.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
7177277 No.7177277 [Reply] [Original]

I'd like to have a discussion, and perhaps some book recommendations on the subject of "Academic Capitalism".

From what I understand, this concept is that education is being pushed in a direction that emphasizes net present value of investment on education and usefulness to society (in terms of increased productivity and wealth) rather than focusing on education and academia as a valid pursuit in its own right.

STEM is fine, and I personally enjoy mathematics quite stimulating, but it seems like kids are pushed to focus on "practical" studies like engineering, even though this sort of work is not suitable or enjoyable for everyone. It seems children today only have 3 options for life related to education: don't go to college and start a business, major in STEM and become a doctor or an engineer, or become good at sales and networking and go into middle management.

Those who study history, or philosophy, or literature, or economic doctrines, are seen as equally disposable as people who work in manual labor like construction or fast food. We've come as a society to believe that the only worthwhile mental focuses are those that increase income or wealth, on a personal or national basis.

Note that I don't have a problem with Capitalism as an economic system, but at what point did academic study not relating to monetary wealth become expendable and unnecessary?

Anybody have any thoughts on this concept, and any good books, articles, blogs, or other related media?

http://www.theguardian.com/higher-education-network/2015/sep/25/japans-humanities-chop-sends-shivers-down-academic-spines

>> No.7177315

>>7177277
>Based New England

Also, it's true that education is now seen as valuable only when it equates to future earnings.
No value is placed on self betterment or cultural and historical knowledge.

I'm a Computer Science major, and I think it's a pretty shallow, unfulfilling field. But I can earn a lot of money doing it. So everyone acts like it's a big deal that I do computer science.

It's not a big deal. It's not that hard. There are correct answers to questions, you just need to know how to get there. What I consider to be hard is thinking about questions with no clear answers and evaluating the validity of other people's approaches to those questions.

>> No.7177327

>>7177277
>that map
I didn't realize spics were this far behind tbh, it's going to take a long time for that community to catch up.
Even redneck West Virginia is above California, which leads me to question the veracity of this map.

>> No.7177335

>>7177315
If you or any student likes CS, then I would say totally go for it. I'm not a humanities student myself either. But you're right, the world doesn't care right now about art, or history, or philosophy. Those studies and intellectual pursuits are extremely valuable and useful to society, but as they are hard to quantify this way, they fall into being a pursuit best followed by rich people or by those who are impractical and silly.

>> No.7177355
File: 38 KB, 512x343, winklevoss_twins_interview_social_network_movie_armie_hammer_josh_pence.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
7177355

>>7177277

Most people at universities shouldn't be at universities in the first place. Once you realize this, it makes sense that there would be pressure for these people to at least get some extra future income out of their High-School 2.0 experience. If you're smart enough to contribute anything in more esoteric fields, then you should be smart enough to rate a top 30 university or top 15 liberal arts college. From one of those institutions it's common to study a liberal arts field and still get a good job through networking/internships/general high drive and intelligenceI personally think a society where everyone can study such things would be a beautiful society, but the academy is an unnecessary accessory to the level most people will ever take it to.

>Is this a map of whiteness distribution?
>Oh, it's IQ.

Feels good to be from Alabama and still have an IQ of at least 150.

>> No.7177357

>>7177335
>But you're right, the world doesn't care right now about art, or history, or philosophy
yes it does, there's just far more students than those fields actually need
you guys are acting as if that in the past everyone was studying philosophy and art and then going into those careers
in truth it was mostly just children of the landed gentry going to study, then come home and continue living off their serfs

>> No.7177361

>tfw when AZ
>doomed to a lifetime of mental retardation

>> No.7177379

That's how it's always been. And if your parents are forming over a fuckton of money, they're going to try and pressure you into doing something that makes money.

I'm not saying that you specifically have your parents forking the bill, but that is who does it for a lot of people. Those people are obviously going to be pressured into going into a field that has money.

>> No.7177382

>the humanities will die out in your lifetime
>the world will be ruled by STEM fedora redditors

>> No.7177387

>>7177379
>a fuckton of money

Land of the free.

>> No.7177390

>>7177357
I made a mistake in saying the world, I meant to say most of the world, or in other terms, the popular ideology is that these subjects are of less usefulness and thus less importance. I apologize.

And you're right, in the past, there was art and literature, but it was mostly partaken of by rich or wealthy people. Before that, people were generally uneducated--they hunted and farmed and that was the point of life. There was a period of time though, in between the renaissance and the middle of the 20th century, that education was seen as a worthy pursuit of one's life, and education had intrinsic value. That changed sometime in the last century.

>>7177355
Nice posturing, mr genius.

>> No.7177401

>>7177277
IMO "classical academic education" and "economic/productivity education" should be separated

make subjects like comp science and engineering part of the latter and increase the amount of students in those programs

then put all humanities into the "classic education" category and reduce the amount of spots in those programs significantly so that only the best and most dedicated get in

I believe that even stuff like sociology or the infamous women's studies have value but right now they have far too many wishy-washy idiots in them with no intellectual rigor.

>> No.7177403

>>7177387
Yes, in America people have to pay for their children's college a lot of the time and it's a massively expensive undertaking of which you personally receive no benefit.

So obviously if you're forking out thousands of dollars, youre going to pressure your child into picking a field that actually returns the investment so it doesn't feel like a complete waste of your money.

>> No.7177404

>>7177390
>implying I said I was a genius
The truth is that even at the top universities you only get a handful of worthwhile humanities scholars per class. Just going to class with those people doesn't make me anybody. That's why I did a science major.

>> No.7177410

>>7177403
disturbing stuff

feels good to be European and study whatever i want for my own knowledge without worrying about finances

>> No.7177412

>>7177390
That was before the collected works of humanity were freely available to literally everyone. Education wasnt treated the same as it is now because it was completely different to obtain.

Now you can learn about any subject you're interested in to a certain extent without having to actually pursue it. The pursuit itself is largely gone.

>> No.7177423

>>7177404
Isn't a 150 iq classified as a genius?

>> No.7177430

>>7177412
Information overload probably contributes to less interest, as you're saying. We have all this info at our fingertips, and we can't possibly value it as much as those who felt it a privilege to learn from rare works.

>> No.7177433

>>7177423
yes

not that IQ by itself means much other than potential and in the real world you need more than that, if you didn't then we'd already have autistic savant overlords

>> No.7177434
File: 61 KB, 567x473, image.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
7177434

>>7177277
Montanafag here
not to be /pol/ but

>> No.7177438

>>7177423
I'd have to look that up, That really is my IQ measurement, but that doesn't mean much taken alone.

>> No.7177445

>>7177410
yeah it's a shame that your "free" unis are dogshit though

>> No.7177449

>>7177430
Well back then if you were rich you had literally fuck all to do with your time. This was before you could even listen to music without hearing it actually being sang live. Books were rare and many of them were either religious or scientific texts. You had NOTHING to do with your time. So the wealthy would pick a subject that interested them, and then they had to actually seek out answers to the smallest questions. They planned expeditions and often either died or disappeared. The pursuit of greater knowledge was an adventure of itself. You had to plan a 6 month expedition to some random place to learn about it, with a good chance you'd die or be crippled just in the attempt.

>> No.7177459

>It seems children today only have 3 options for life related to education: don't go to college and start a business, major in STEM and become a doctor or an engineer, or become good at sales and networking and go into middle management.

if you spent your whole life on the internet talking to underachievers on 4chan, your parents, and your high school guidance counselor, it's understandable why you'd internalize this kind of thinking.

but obviously there are other career paths out there besides STEM, and they're perfectly viable if you actually try to pursue them.

>> No.7177463

>>7177410
>pays massive tax rates
>wow look at all this free shit!
You deserve to be a peasant tbh. People with the ability to manage personal finances all moved to America apparently.

>> No.7177478

>>7177463
>People with the ability to manage personal finances all moved to America apparently.

yeah your debt levels really show that tbh ;^)

>> No.7177481
File: 9 KB, 110x137, topcuck.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
7177481

>>7177463
>free shit
>mfw continental unis are literal shit
Who /anlgosphere/ here?

>> No.7177486

>>7177434
stop, you're making us look bad

>> No.7177489

>>7177478
>babby's first economics
there's that free "education" at work

>> No.7177491

>>7177459
Of course other paths are viable, but looked on by society as less important.

>> No.7177493

>>7177478
>national debt = personal finance
>implying American government and government-indebted corporations don't low-key own most of our national debt so it'll never actually be paid off and nobody will ever care
Wow, Euros are even dumber than I thought.

>> No.7177497

>>7177463
i really hope you're not seriously defending american education costs

>> No.7177498

>>7177379
>>7177387
>>7177403
>>7177410
>>7177445
>>7177463
>>7177478
>>7177481
>>7177489

>thread develops into a dick measuring contest

What did I really expect?

>> No.7177500

>>7177491
does that really matter to you?

i promise you that you will get laid more as an architect, a graphic designer, a photographer, or a translator, than you ever will as a doctor, which is what really counts at the end of the day imo.

>> No.7177502

>>7177497
they could be cheaper, it's just hilarious to see euros who brag about going to low ranking unis
>a-at least my rocks are cheaper than your diamonds!

>> No.7177506

>>7177497
Not at all. Tuition and fees in America are out of control due to the student-loan system and inflated administrations, but calling something you pay taxes to fund, "free," is pretty silly. That's like calling your roads, "free."

>> No.7177507

>>7177315
Comp Sci is full of unsolved (unsolvable?) problems, breh. It seems to me that you think computer science = software engineering.

>> No.7177510

>>7177500
>you will never have sex regardless of your occupation

>> No.7177513

>>7177500
This is why I'm a writer (no, seriously I am). I get to harvest the pussy crop that all my friends in real professions think they're planting.

>> No.7177519
File: 257 KB, 1919x765, Untitled.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
7177519

THANK YOU /lit/ FOR ANOTHER MIND-BLOWING DISCUSSION

>> No.7177522
File: 2 KB, 98x95, angry pepe.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
7177522

>>7177277
>Those who study history, or philosophy, or literature, or economic doctrines, are seen as equally disposable as people who work in manual labor like construction or fast food. We've come as a society to believe that the only worthwhile mental focuses are those that increase income or wealth, on a personal or national basis.

No offense, but you have a very limited and ignorant view on wealth on wealth creation. Not every product or export is based on material elements. A country's biggest resource is its' human and intellectual capital.

Also, governments and societies require administrators, philosophers, designers, etc to manage, implement and develop public and private institutions. Take my degree for example. I study history of international relations at a top 5 university, and will be joining my country's diplomatic institutions soon enough. Even though my degree isn't STEM-related, I'm still an asset for my government.

>> No.7177525

>>7177519
the question has been answered tbh

>> No.7177533

>>7177277
>Those who study history, or philosophy, or literature, or economic doctrines, are seen as equally disposable as people who work in manual labor like construction or fast food.

Did you get your life experience from Reddit?

>> No.7177535

>>7177500
It does matter a bit to me. Mainly because I think these subjects are important, and I worry about losing them eventually.

Also, choosing an occupation so you can get laid easier is hilarious.

>> No.7177539

>>7177535
Getting laid easily is great though. He's suggesting a pleasurable path to more pleasure, so I don't see the downside. It's putting in effort at getting laid that's draining and pathetic.

>> No.7177542

>>7177533
University, opinion articles, and many people I know who believe that those who don't earn a lot or make something practical are useless.

>> No.7177553

>>7177542

see >>7177522

>> No.7177557

>>7177553
I agree, it's silly, but that's honestly the community I grew up in.

>> No.7177560

>>7177522
>>7177553
cool dude you studied at a top university to be a public servant earning 60k a year
working for the fucking state

>> No.7177564

>>7177560
someone has to do it tho

>> No.7177571

>>7177542
is this what americans are really like? wow

>> No.7177581

>>7177571
It's what americans who have a protestant work ethic are like. Can't blame 'em, and they're not bad people, but just have different ideas on life than I do.

>> No.7177594

>>7177560
Again, you have a very limited and ignorant view on wealth and wealth creation. Not every product or export is based on material elements.

>> No.7177599

>>7177594
no I don't

>> No.7177600

There is no point in pursuing education as an end in itself anymore because all of the educators, like all of society in general, has lost the ancient ideal of the liberal education. The word virtue is not in currency anymore, and that tells you everything you need to know. You can blame the plebs but especially the bourgeois demagogues who murdered the aristocrats, i.e. the people devoted to a higher form of life. Read Moliere's Bourgeois Gentilhomme for an early insight into how the new class would use education as a means for social power rather than edification.

>> No.7177609

>>7177599
If you lack the imagination to even think about any example, let me help you. Tell me some of the biggest exports of the US, and I'll show you how a significant element is not based on material elements, bu require artistic and intellectual development and design.

>> No.7177616

>>7177609
I'm not denying that there is a market for liberal arts
but you shouldn't use a job working for the state to prove that tbh

>> No.7177620

>>7177609

that's called labour, which has its basis in the material reproduction of a labouring body

>> No.7177632

lot of contemporary social problems are the result of that our leaders are engineers and lawyers

bring us plato's idea of a nation led by elite philosophers and see how plenty of shit gets fixed

>> No.7177634

>>7177616

So you do agree that there is a marketable value in a liberal arts degree? And why are you condescending on public employment? A civilized society requires highly educated civil servants.

>>7177620
Design and content development are not the same kind of labour in your materialistic point of view.

>> No.7177642

>>7177634

the various forms of labour in the division of labour all have their base in the material production of labouring bodies

>> No.7177646

>>7177642

That does not mean that the wealth created by that product is (mainly) based on materialistic elements. Take an Iphone for example. It's value is more than just the combined value of the metals and plastics its made of. The design and content development is what gives it its value. Back to econ 101 for you, guess your STEM degree failed you.

>> No.7177647

OP here, gonna go to bed. If you have any books or media relating to the discussion, please share. This subject interest me, and I would like to study it further in the future.

>> No.7177649

>>7177634
because public servants are generally total pieces of shit at all levels

>> No.7177661

>>7177649

So your problem is with their personality, not their occupation?

>> No.7177664

>>7177661
it's with both

>> No.7177668

>>7177646

>The design and content development is what gives it its value.

its value, as opposed to its use-value or exchange value, is entirely social

"Design" and "content development" are production processes and no more create values than that they are products of labour

>> No.7177673

>>7177390
>between the renaissance and the middle of the 20th century, that education was seen as a worthy pursuit of one's life, and education had intrinsic value. That changed sometime in the last century.
Not really, mass education largely came about as part of the nation-forming process and the rise of the bourgeoisie. There were academics that learned for learning's sake, but they were always in the minority. Face it, Philistines were always the majority, and will continue to be if we as a collective species don't start eliminating them and their progeny.

>> No.7177679

>>7177668

You're arguing about something that's irrelevant to this discussion. We're arguing about what constitutes wealth creation, regardless of the fact that the wealth created stems from the intrinsic material aspects or the social value attributed to the object. Design and content development are labour-based aspects of the production process, but that does not negate their value. Their products are still valued by their non-materialistic labour input.

>> No.7177697

>>7177679

there is no 'labour input' that has no material base

the continued existence of mental states and processes relies on the material reproduction of the labouring body, aka material sustenance, nutriment etc. the social values given to the products of said labor are not 'based' on whether or not said labor is mental or physical, a distinction which has no relevance inasmuch as mutual dynamism is the necessary condition of their theoretical separation in any case. The surplus value created by the labouring body/mind for the capitalist is what enables in the final case the accumulation of wealth and hence the motion of capital, regardless of the ideological conditions that surround an individual's notions about 'artistic' or 'intellectual' 'value' at point of purchase/sale etc.

>> No.7177702

>>7177277
Sounds like a good thing to me.

>> No.7177716

>>7177355
That's a 150IQ post/opinion?
hahaha

>> No.7177717

>>7177702
muh bait

>> No.7177725

>>7177716

pattern recognition =/= deep thought

but with their powers combined they are Captain Planet

>> No.7177729

>>7177403
Good, education should not be subsidiesd.

>> No.7177732

>>7177729
why not?

education=investment

>> No.7177834

>>7177697

Your material reductionism is astounding. Again, you're missing the point. We're arguing about what constitutes wealth creation, regardless of the fact that the wealth created stems from the intrinsic material aspects or the social value attributed to the object. We're not debating the basis of material production. Every product requires a material or labouring body at a certain point of the production process. But this element does not imply that the end product (or the wealth creation) is solely based on the material aspects of said product. You keep arguing about a specific aspect of a complex and broad production process that isn't even relevant to the argument.

>> No.7177857

>>7177729

The biggest asset of a nation is the intellectual and human capital of its population. Why not invest in education by subsidizing it?

>> No.7177863

>>7177834

>Every product requires a material or labouring body at a certain point of the production process.

>at a certain point

at every instance

>But this element does not imply that the end product (or the wealth creation)

products do not create wealth. Wealth accumulation (as opposed to simple hoarding) has its origin in the appropriation of surplus value from generalized labour, which is realized in direct form (or money-form) with the production of commodities for exchange


all the aspects of production you want to refer to as other than 'material' necessarily have their base in the material condition of the economic organization of society

that is the point

>> No.7177879

>>7177863
>at every instance

No. Designing or creating content does not imply a material aspect at every instance. Its implementation does.

> production of commodities for exchange

Again, your material reductionism is too simplistic for a modern economy. The production of goods and/or services that are exchanged are and/or contribute to the creation of wealth.
Just because the implementation of certain creations, ideas and designs require a material element, does not imply that these complex products or services can be reduced to their material aspect. If these were the case, our economies would hardly have advanced the last few decades, as the material basis of many products are still these same. Hence your simplistic material reductionism.

>> No.7177921

>>7177879


...Anonymous
09/30/15(Wed)02:09:08 No.7177893
>>7177826 (OP) #

>Just because the implementation of certain creations, ideas and designs require a material element, does not imply that these complex products or services can be reduced to their material aspect.

at every instance every aspect of the capitalist mode of production can be reduced to relations between labour and capital, said relations being reducible to the respective material conditions for their existence.

whether specific modes of labor-power have their base in mental or physical activity is irrelevant to the material condition of socially necessary labor-time and how specifically this labor is utilized in the actual production of commodities and services

>the material basis of many products is the same

the material base of the production of commodities is necessarily historically and socially contingent, and varies accordingly to social and political forces of motion, which in turn have their base in material conditions that always precede them

>> No.7177923

As a phd student, I can confirm that academia is now a shithole and a waste of time, for the reasons presented in OP.

>> No.7177932

>>7177921
I'm not going to beat a dead horse and repeat the same arguments about your material reductionism. But if this is your point of view, at least be consistent you apply it to the topic we're discussing. If this is the case, many STEM-related subjects are then also at the same level you would place liberal art subjects at. Are you willing to disregard subjects like math also? Then you should redefine STEM-degrees to STE-degrees.

>> No.7177935

>>7177932

I'm not a student and I don't care for mathematics or liberal arts or for that matter ideological state education very particularly

not sure what you're getting at

>> No.7177951

>>7177315
You clearly aren't very far into your studies if you think CompSci is a shallow, unfulfilling field without questions that have no clear answers.

>> No.7177955

>>7177935
> production of commodities for exchange

Oh, it's simply what the whole thread and the discussion was about. I guess this explains why your arguments were off point.

>> No.7177959

>>7177955

I haven't even read through the op

I was challenging your assertion that 'value' is somehow magically created by 'artistry' and 'intellect' outside of the necessary material condition for the relation between laborer and capital

>> No.7177960

>>7177507
I think there are even some problems people have proven the solvability of which can't be proven.

>> No.7177962

>>7177277
So is IQ inversely correlated to how many Mexicans and Blacks a state has?

>> No.7177965

>>7177355
>IQ of at least 150.
I thought anything past 140 was considered pointless dick-measuring that's barely even accurate.
>yeah, turns out you're in the top 99.995%, that's totally an achievable degree of precision

>> No.7177967

>>7177401
Comp sci (maths, logic, and physics) is mostly academic, you're thinking of software engineering.

>> No.7177971

>>7177600
>the people devoted to a higher form of life
You're thinking the clergy bro.

>> No.7178094

>>7177959

Nobody is arguing that design and content development is somehow magically created. I'm arguing that these complex production processes are far more than your characterization that a product is solely defined by its material conditions. The specific relation between labour and capital is irrelevant to this creative production. You can take your Marxist materialism elsewhere.

>> No.7178098

>>7178094

Christ, you're a moron

go read a book

>> No.7178116

>>7178098

Alternatively, you can drop the ad hominems and actually articulate your argument.

>> No.7178141

>>7178116

>Being on 4chan
>Ever expecting civilized discussion

>> No.7178174

>>7178116

the production of commodities under the capitalist mode of production does not create surplus value from anything but the direct exploitation of surplus value from a labouring body

there

whether or not a commodity is 'defined' in common parlance 'solely' by the material conditions of its production is entirely irrelevant

>> No.7178270

>>7178174

You keep repeating this line from your textbook, but god dam it man read the dam thread. It has nothing to do with the intrinsic value of a liberal arts degree and the creative ability it instills.

>> No.7178291

>>7178270

right

like I said I'm not answering the OP

like I said, I'm challenging your assertion that the accumulation of wealth under the capitalist mode arises from anything other than the surplus value which has its origin in the exploitation of bodily labor power

im not going to repeat myself or change the subject for the sake of conversation any longer

>> No.7178295

>>7178291

Why even enter a conversation you don't know anything about? And you're arguing a strawman. I never argued the thing I was claiming. Again, read the actual arguments made in the context of OP's assertion, or don't enter the discussion.

>> No.7178296

>>7178295
>I never argued the thing you are claiming I did*

>> No.7178299

>>7178174

Holy shit, is this what happens when you make an autist read Capital?

>> No.7178318

>>7178299

I advise everyone to read Das Kapital. But I equally advise parents to keep their autistic children from reading it, without a proper economic background. It will exacerbate their autism. They'll just keep blurring out lines they've read, without even realizing what they're saying.

>> No.7178322

>>7178299

what's the issue with the argument as such?

>>7178295

I guess there's been a legitimate misunderstanding on my part

>> No.7178373

>>7177277
Why do so many people fall into the trap of identifying yourself with your major? The fucking golden rule is that it is not your major, but your personality that makes who you are. Yes, a sociology student can get a great career if he has the right personality whereas an engineer can have a shit career because of his shit personality

No, I don't study humanities or STEM, and I don't want to act like I know it all, but really, it's your personality that makes or breaks a good career

>> No.7178518

>>7177717
Wrong.

>> No.7178532

>>7177732
>>7177857
It's not an investment when people are forced to pay for it. I'd rather not be forced to pay for others education, instead put the whole thing on the market.

>> No.7178533

>>7177729
Also, check 'em!

>> No.7178549

>>7178532
>It's not an investment when people are forced to pay for it

I don't think you understand the concept of government subsidies.

>> No.7178591

>>7177382
>the economy will be automatised in your lifetime
>a Greek renaissance unseen since the days of slavery occurs

>> No.7178671

>>7178174
You're arguing with someone who already ate the red pill m8. What you're saying is self evident, but that's part of the problem with economics as a philosophy. If someone isnt able to recognize certain truths of social relations -- and let's face it, many people are blind in this regard -- then he will far for whatever economic model his Neoliberal overlord informs him is the correct one.

Marx diagnosis of capitalism was mindblowingly accurate. His solution, however, was/is a crapshoot ideal.

>> No.7178697

How many good writers have come out of MFA programs? Zero.

How many good readers have come out of MFA programs? Maybe a couple, but this is just because there's so many of them.

It's not about promoting practical studies vs arts. It's about practical studies vs literally useless shit.

>> No.7178730

>>7178697
Usefulness has nothing to do with it,and you'd know that if you actually read the OP

>> No.7178835

>>7178549
It's a shifting of stolen goods is what it is.

>> No.7179252

>>7177935
>I'm not a student and I don't care for mathematics or liberal arts or for that matter ideological state education very particularly

This is your brain on dogmatist marxism.

>> No.7181559

>>7177965
>I thought anything past 140 was considered pointless dick-measuring that's barely even accurate.


Pretty much, at that point it is just absurd approximation.

>> No.7181594

>'lol eurocucks u actually pay taxes for things like education and healthcare??? gross lol enjoy ur 9000% taxes XD'
>meanwhile 600 billion each year goes towards 'defence' and bombing sand people in some far off land most citizens can't even pronounce

americans.

>> No.7181598

>>7181594
kek

>> No.7181612

STEM is the only worthwhile direction in college because the humanities have been corrupted by liberal propaganda

>> No.7181613

>>7181594

Exactly what do these two things have to do with each other?

>> No.7181636

>>7181612
that still doesn't make STEM worthwhile

>> No.7181642

>>7181612
"liberal propaganda"
another meme poster

>> No.7181646

>>7181594
You don't have to spend a significant amount of your GDP on defense because the U.S. takes care of it for you (except for, to a certain extent, France and the U.K.). And even with that, the national debt of most western European countries, as a percentage of their GDP, is higher than that of the U.S.

>> No.7181648

>>7181642

You seriously contend that academia is not a breeding house for liberal ideologies?

>> No.7181665

>>7181648
Depends, do you seriously contend ignorant, violent backwaters aren't the breeding house of conservative ideologies?

>> No.7181669

>>7181646
yeah, I can hardly imagine the state the world would be in if the USA wasn't around to defend iraq from their own oil

>> No.7181671

>>7181665

>implying the one excuses the other

Both are equally bad

>> No.7181674

>>7181671
well the important thing is that you've found a way to feel smugly superior to both

>> No.7181676

>>7178835

baby's first libertarianism

>> No.7181875

Why does every thread turn into bullshit politics? Why can't we stay on topic?

>> No.7182861

If you look at academic capitalism from a power theory perspective it appears to me to be an obvious practice of socioeconomic exclusion.

Today's modern economy is incredibly complex, and while a material basis is always necessary to have wealth generation (by producing 'value,' for the sake of this argument) - in order for wealth generation to occur in the first world a "knowledge class" is required to analyze this value thereby generating greater wealth.

The appeal to academic capitalism is the consequent of the upper socioeconomic echelons creating impossible conditions for a basic standard of living in the first world; i.e. a college degree being a "necessary" tool for maintaining a life above the poverty line. These conditions: the dismantling of labor unions, the erosion of social services, and the shift in business culture away from properly investing in / training / and developing their own work force effectively force individuals who are not born into (some level of) wealth out of the running for an above-poverty standard of living.

This is justified in guise of "meritocracy" where in reality only those who can afford to pay for college, pay their living expenses during college, and work numerous internships, in expensive cities, for free after graduation (i.e. they have rich parents) can be expected to succeed (outliers non-withstanding).

This resentment towards the upper classes, paired with these new conditions of standard living, paradoxically push non-upper-class individuals towards universities but also towards anti-intellectual mindsets - hence the STEM surge and waning value of liberal arts in the public eye.

In reality these liberal arts and social sciences are vital to the creation of new wealth in the first world - in management, law, consulting, and analytics roles (I, for example, studied Sociology and Philosophy in Uni and work as an Analyst at a top 10 marketing firm - most of my engineering friends failed to find work in the field at the entry level). The blue collar / first generation students' blindness towards the value of liberal arts and humanities, which are also in part a consequent of these new conditions of living, serve as another form of socioeconomic exclusion.

This is to say nothing of the non-economic side of the argument and the intrinsic value of education.

>> No.7183024

This thread and every post in it is utterly irrelevant, as (much) human labor is on the cusp of being uneconomical. Large swaths of workers, whether they have a liberal arts education or not, will not have any jobs to work at, therefore no way of supporting themselves, and the resulting social upheaval is going to dismantle and rework everything anyways.

The only question is how are we going to adjust to a new social structure? I think a liberal arts education has a place in that future, but it's debatable.

>> No.7183233

>>7177277
Education is being pushed as a product to be consumed. The main thing is that you bought it, and they hope you'll buy more. That's what "academic capitalism" gets you.

>> No.7183411

>>7182861
>anti-intellectual mindsets
>STEM
cry more retard

>> No.7183967

>>7183411
What a riviting contribution to this discussion.
STEM majors are what most blue collar and 1st gen students flock to - in spite of an over saturation and the glaring fact that no company would willingly hire anyone with less than several years of experience into a non-intern position. Straight-STEM students stunt themselves by focusing in on narrow subjects without gaining the discursive and critical thinking skills that make higher education a worthwhile investment in the first place.

>>7183233
I agree.
Its becoming both a commodity and a necessity, but for none of the right reasons.

>> No.7184174

>>7183024
>>7182861

utter retardation

read more

>> No.7184241

>>7177277
Im starting to study filmmaking and i have already accepted the notion that i might have to forgo family or material comfort since I have no desire to make mainstream films.

>> No.7184245

>>7177434
If you control for non whites the results are pretty much the same: the south is fucking dumb