I don't understand why it's so remarkably wrong?
I never said the subject was "wrong".
[/quote]
But it isn't okay for the taxpayer to pay for it? Even though the generic skills picked up in such a course would be just as valuable as whatever skills you pick up, in say, commerce. The difference being that the skills one picks up in Arts are transferable and makes one versatile, as opposed to the skills picked up in career specific degrees which are less transferable but lead to a more direct path.
Probably irrelevant: To me, it made sense to study arts because it put me in touch with *knowledge*, as opposed to other degrees which are more specific, dated, mechanical, and extremely specific to our context (as in, the humanities - and law is traditionally a humanities subject - and an approximation of science have been around since thought, but many other things you can study now don't have illustrious histories, and try to explain modern things, as opposed to just things). I know this is probably an unfair portrayal of other degrees, but I'm not so obsessed with the supremacy of the current world that I feel like that's what I should limit my study to.
And in doing arts, I do have a career in mind. And back-ups if that doesn't work out.
you did put an anti- spin on the whole thing in the title.
How is it "anti-Arts"?
You aren't trying to say that you're portraying a completely balanced outlook on the whole issue, are you?
It's anti-arts because you said that 'arts students to have difficulty finding jobs' ignoring that:
a) according to the article, everyone will have difficulty finding jobs, including people who do 'generalist degrees'; and
b) the reasons why this happens has little to do with the degree itself, rather the type of people who are more likely to do the degree.
In essence, it is anti-arts because it's simplistic. The bias is fine, it's not a problem or an accusation. We're all biased, right? It's unlikely that I'll ever post a link that I totally disagree with (unless I think it's absurdly funny).
It is also rather characteristic of you to latch onto a couple of words and in turn ignore the fact that I've put together an actual argument that you 'won't' dispute. This 'anti-arts' thing is extremely peripheral (perhaps in the end, irrelevant?) to the point I was making.
Home
Help
Search
Login
