Before I begin the process of inditing my opinions regarding the two texts, it's only fair that I explain why William Deresiewicz's article intrigued me more than usual. Given my tendency to digress, I sincerely hope this doesn't turn into a short story! Ever since I turned 12, my parents had a definite idea of which occupation they wanted me to enter. I was never presented with a choice. Becoming a 'doctor' was almost like an axiom! Naturally, my parents nearly collapsed at the thought of their only daughter joining a 'liberal arts' university. Kindly take a moment to imagine how distinctly Adolf Hitler would stand out amidst a crowd of people in 2015. (If he were reborn, of course. Thank goodness for unalterable mortality!) That's exactly…show more content…
The money? Moreover, it disgusts me when people put certain 'commercial' careers on a gold pedestal and disregard the rest. I'm not against professions such as 'doctors' and 'engineers' at all. How could I? The contributions and advancements have been phenomenal! What is irksome is the realization that—as Deresiewicz mentions—'learning for its own sake' is under attack. A clear example is that of a person who is solely studying medicine compared to another who is studying medicine along with interdisciplinary fields. Which one of the two is most likely to benefit from thoughtful self-cultivation? Since when did the acquisition of education become a means of being financially secure in the future? To quote Deresiewicz, 'Education should be about learning, thinking, reflecting, and growing.' The way I see it, the moment an individual allows education to become a quest for money, he loses the real 'telos' of acquiring knowledge. He then becomes a mere competitor of this dog eat dog world. Neoliberalism is one of the reasons behind this.
Deresiewicz's article is a bitter pill to swallow. He presents the unembellished truth with accuracy. The facts are laid out; the reality of the situation is displayed without being
The money? Moreover, it disgusts me when people put certain 'commercial' careers on a gold pedestal and disregard the rest. I'm not against professions such as 'doctors' and 'engineers' at all. How could I? The contributions and advancements have been phenomenal! What is irksome is the realization that—as Deresiewicz mentions—'learning for its own sake' is under attack. A clear example is that of a person who is solely studying medicine compared to another who is studying medicine along with interdisciplinary fields. Which one of the two is most likely to benefit from thoughtful self-cultivation? Since when did the acquisition of education become a means of being financially secure in the future? To quote Deresiewicz, 'Education should be about learning, thinking, reflecting, and growing.' The way I see it, the moment an individual allows education to become a quest for money, he loses the real 'telos' of acquiring knowledge. He then becomes a mere competitor of this dog eat dog world. Neoliberalism is one of the reasons behind this.
Deresiewicz's article is a bitter pill to swallow. He presents the unembellished truth with accuracy. The facts are laid out; the reality of the situation is displayed without being
Related
- Better Essays
Cultural Comparison - Russia and US Education
- 6674 Words
- 27 Pages
A Cultural Comparison of Higher Education in Russia and the United States of America Intercultural Communications August 19th, 2014 “Inculcation is the gradual coming to know something through mundane processes of training and learning” (Chetro-Szivos, J. Lecture 1). Through inculcation we acquire a set of dispositions that mold the body and eventually become second nature to the actor. Paralleling this concept with education systems
- 6674 Words
- 27 Pages
Better Essays