There goes the other side of the argument. There are schools which are fun to go to. The problem is with people's mentalities too. Would someone select a guy who went to school or someone who spent a long time at the library for a job ?. You decide.
Some people have priorities, and fun usually isn't #1 for them. So "kicking back and having fun all day", doesn't help much. In fact, it is a major time waster to people who have other things to do, things they want to actually learn. That's why i'm not going to college, look at the people who are going.. they're basically going to pay themselves into debt with either their loans or parents' money, and the motivating factor is the "fun", "socializing" aspect. So they can "make new friends" and perhaps "party on the weekends". Well.. I guess when you're throwing away your parents' money at least, it isn't a big deal, but when you finally grow up, all the time-wasting and bullshitting didn't really help did it? As far as who would get selected, I'm guessing most employers would pick the guy who will just be able to get through the day and keep the company "secure", so chances are they'll pick the guy who went to school. Fortunately for myself, I won't have to put up with employers, and whenever I am one myself, I'll pick people with creative minds who don't put "stats" on their resume.
learning can be fun too. It's a matter of horses for courses. Some people are suited to traditional schools and others would be better served by self-learning. So we need both systems, as options which are equally valid.
I get what you're saying, both options should be available. I would just differ on how it is paid for.
Yes, people don't place enough importance or value on self learning. I have learned more useful information from various books and websites than from school, but school does have it's values.
I have yet to find anyone besides iul who will argue on this forum that someone else has a right to take property from me, for their own use and that it is morally justified. iul's position was (sorta) that morality isn't a human right. That it's negotiable. So yeah, how education is paid for matters. Particularly in the US, where we throw more and more money for less and less return.
I know you like to justify your choice not to go to college, but I think you are making a false argument. Sure some people go to party or socialize, but most go to get an education and are very aware that they are paying for it and try to get the most out of it. Like everything in life, it takes some personal discipline. It sounds like you have that, so what is your worry, that you would be tempted to party instead of study? Nate, someone with a thirst for knowledge, like you appear to have, would excel in college. There is so much to learn and in spite of your best efforts it cannot all be simply learned from a book. There are a lot of really good professors who know how to teach. You should not keep yourself from getting an education just because some other kids don't take full advantage of that opportunity.
I would argue that there is so much to learn and it cannot all be simply learned by going to college. There are a lot of good professors, and some lousy ones too. Perhaps higher education had to be pursued at a college 20 years ago, but with the digital age starting to take off, one does not have to restrict themselves to a particular campus or institution to acquire or understand knowledge.
I am not suggesting to limit yourself to what you would learn in college. Learning is a life long process. I would encourage him to add it to what he is already doing. Nor am I saying that he should go to a particular type of school or course. I am merely suggesting that he might be limiting himself based on his thinking that others squander the opportunity. I am sure there are very good online course, but they are usually from a college or university. That would be included in what I am suggesting he consider. I find it odd that you would take a position that seeking additional education is a bad thing.
It's not odd when you misinterpret my position. I believe that the free market is capable of and may already have delivered better alternatives than conventional educational establishments. Education is ongoing and necessary. It is not done when one gets their piece of paper from a school. It's not exclusively a credential or stepping stone to a career. IMO, colleges today are basically vocational schools. People spend much less time learning knowledge, and more time learning how to apply knowledge to the work place. But that's my personal bias.
I was just encouraging someone not to discount college because some other kids squander the opportunity. Since that was the post you replied to, it seemed like you were taking a different position.
Here's my view, in a nutshell: Education is not an accumulation of facts alone, but a process of learning. It is viable (in the literal sense of the word - an organic thing that responds to stimulation, is stimulating and vivid, vital itself). Stretching all the way back to childhood, there are moments given as gifts by some remarkable teachers that I can never forget, and these gifts could never have been achieved by reading a book in the isolation of my mind. At Berkeley, in the brace of classes, lecture groups, and, eventually, graduate seminars, I was afforded an opportunity to learn from, and to engage in, the most dynamic community of minds one could ever hope to ask for. None of this would have happened by reading alone, and reading, alone. There are crappy teachers, and crappy schools. But do not believe self-study can supplant the richness that can be obtained only by education, as it has been pursued for almost the entirety of our existence as a species: the role of a teacher, in my mind, is about as sacred a thing as this atheist could embrace. What the Japanese call isshin den shin, mind to mind transmission of worthy things, requires this kind of human relationship, along with all the other incidentals that are endemic to the community education environment. I am not around, and don't expect to be. I feel this forum has irreparably degraded and I no longer serve any purpose in continuing the useless arguing. But I chime in here in all sincerity - Nate, others who would toss out a public education (meaning, in consort with others): I said it earlier, and this is out of compassion, not judgment or trying to win a point: think on what can be obtained, and what lost, by eschewing the community of minds that can come with study among others.
I understand what you're saying, but what would you have to say in regards to the "it's not what you know, but who you know" statement? Is it possible that knowing, networking and discussing with others who know more than you in certain areas, could be near equivalent to the effectiveness of teachers? Also, it's ashame you don't frequent the boards as often, gets boring sometimes
I haven't seen a forum which doesn't degrade once in a while, some are always in various states of degradation. I think a forum these days, for some people atleast means a place for arguing endlessly and meaninglessly, trying to beat other's ideas and belief's into submission and prove yourself and your belief's supreme. Rather than the idealistic notion of a place to share opinions and ideas and learn and imagine with others.