Quote
No it isn't, and that assertion is patently absurd.
A degree is a document that is the culmination of many years worth of studying and testing to pre-established academic standards (as determined by thousands upon thousands of professors, accreditation boards, textbook authors, legislative minimums, etc.). Your statement implies that a degree is just one person's opinion of how smart you are. It isn't.
Like I said before, a degree from an accredited university is a universally accepted standard of ability. It ain't just an arbitrary opinion of a teacher.
To earn a degree, one must prove one's ability to learn and apply specific knowledge to these standards. Many schools intentionally require their students to take extremely difficult core curriculum classes designed to "weed out" those who cannot apply themselves to the extent required. These "weed out courses" are well known among those who survived them; many students don't survive them.
Beyond core curriculum, the difficulty level increases with upper level specialty electives. As an example, in engineering school my weed-out courses were things like physics, electrics and optics, several chemistry courses, thermodynamics, and the like. Some of these courses have absolutely nothing to do with being a structural engineer. But they successfully weeded out the people who couldn't apply themselves with enough discipline. And they also made for a more rounded education across various scientific disciplines. Essentially, these courses made sure only the best got through, and prepared us for the even harder upper-level courses like advanced structural design, environmental engineering, etc.
But again, these courses are designed specifically to not only test the student on his or her absorption of the material, but his or her ability to learn and apply knowledge to real-world design examples. Many hours are spent in laboratories proving theories (my favorite was always building mock-ups and loading them to failure).
In a nutshell, your attempt to minimize higher education by comparing it to a note from a teacher is so incorrect, I have a hard time taking it as anything but sour grapes. If you failed to find good employment with your archaeology degree, it's probably because archaeology isn't a field that's in demand. Blame your choice of degree, but don't blame all of higher education.
Quote
I never claimed it was. We all know that people can be successful without a higher education if they try hard enough. That's not even the argument here. The argument is over the various statements made by you guys that higher education is worthless. And that's simply not true.
You're engaging in a fallacious argument here. You're claiming that one can be successful without a college degree and then construing that to mean that college degrees are worthless. One does not follow the other. And in fact, college degrees are required in certain fields. You simply cannot be successful in the field without the degree. Engineering is my example; an accredited degree is a requirement for professional licensure, and professional licensure is a requirement to practice engineering. The same is true of lawyers, doctors, etc. You can be just as smart and knowledgeable in a subject as anyone else, but without that formal degree, you will never be able to legally practice. And BTW, I'm not arguing that this is necessarily the way things should be, but it's they way they are.
Quote
I don't know what particular jobs those were that you held, but you basically engaged in fraudulent, deceptive behavior. I don't know why you'd want to brag about it.

Help



MultiQuote





"It's not 1789 anymore" isn't a valid argument.












