Quote:
Originally Posted by Brian Swartz
You don't need to go to college to know about history or be able to read classical literature though or better oneself in similar ways. I think learning should be part of an integrated way of life in most cases, not something you set aside several years of your adult life for, with the exception by definition of careers that require that kind of training, academics, etc. Meanwhile a blue-collar worker going to college for a degree gives them a competitive disadvantage against other workers who went straight from high-school to the work force and have years of experience, relevant skills, networking, references, etc.
Uneducated does not mean dumb. I think that's a big disconnect here. You can be intelligent but have even more essential skills in another area. The highly intelligent probably should all go to college but that's a fairly small number of people.
|
You don't need to attend elementary school to learn how to read or do simple math. Plenty of people in history have learned without formal education. So why have them either? Why the arbitrary cutoff?
It's still a choice whether someone wants to go or not. Maybe it creates a competitive disadvantage, but they would still be given the choice to expand their minds in a formal education setting. Everyone shouldn't have to map out their life at 18 years old like you seem to want. Nor should they have a decision to stop formal education due to financial uncertainty.
We know that more education leads to better health, less crime, and more self-reliance. It leads to more stable governments and less oppression in society. Why would we not want our populace to be more educated?
And while uneducated doesn't necessarily mean dumb, there is a correlation.