Of course it’s clickbait, and I don’t see anything wrong with using clickbait titles as long as they aren’t misleading.
It is misleading. The title is “You (Probably) Shouldn’t Go To College.” But you complain specifically about arts, language, and literature majors at private universities. This is not most people who go to college.
Are you disagreeing with that analysis?
Asserting that humanities professors are pretentious jackoffs with dumbass interpretations is more easily interpreted as angry venting than as reasonable argument.
I don’t care if you graduated top of your class with a music degree from Julliard, since it tells me nothing about what type of music you’re capable of composing.
Think of it like this: People care if you graduated top of your class with a music degree from Julliard. Is it stupid? Maybe, but that’s how it is. I didn’t make the rules.
It is misleading. The title is “You (Probably) Shouldn’t Go To College.” But you complain specifically about arts, language, and literature majors at private universities. This is not most people who go to college.
It’s actually for most art degrees in general, which includes nonsense degrees like “Gender Studies” and most sociology. Since these things are soft sciences they’re counted as art degrees instead of proper STEM.
“Social sciences” and a lot of psychology are soft sciences, and possibly even pseudosciences.
Asserting that humanities professors are pretentious jackoffs with dumbass interpretations is more easily interpreted as angry venting than as reasonable argument.
I’m not sure how else to explain it then. It’s self-evident.
Think of it like this: People care if you graduated top of your class with a music degree from Julliard. Is it stupid? Maybe, but that’s how it is. I didn’t make the rules.
Did you have to in order to become a successful musician?
“Social sciences” and a lot of psychology are soft sciences, and possibly even pseudosciences.
You explicitly say at the start of your video that you recommend people go into psychology… You also use images of art supplies in your video whenever you say the word “art”. You also talk about getting paints from Michael’s as a substitute for an arts education. It seems goal-post shifting to now claim you were actually referring to liberal arts in general. It also doesn’t at all address the fact that most college students don’t go to private universities.
Did you have to in order to become a successful musician?
I don’t have to use my right hand to be successful. But it would be silly to make a video called “You (Probably) Shouldn’t Use Your Right Hand”.
You explicitly say at the start of your video that you recommend people go into psychology...
Right but I also said in my response to you:
“Social sciences” and a lot of psychology
You also use images of art supplies in your video whenever you say the word “art”.
It was a type of shorthand. I actually wanted to use other pictures for “studies” degrees but Pixabay is fairly limited.
It seems goal-post shifting to now claim you were actually referring to liberal arts in general.
I thought it was implied when I said art degree and when I didn’t mention things like “studies” degrees in majors I recommend .
It also doesn’t at all address the fact that most college students don’t go to private universities.
Of course, but most major in (not very useful) art degrees and many have crushing debt, unable to pay back loans.
I don’t have to use my right hand to be successful. But it would be silly to make a video called “You (Probably) Shouldn’t Use Your Right Hand”.
Sure you could learn how to use your left hand, but it’s an impedes progress and doesn’t really help you much in achieving your goals. Like art school.
Sure you could learn how to use your left hand, but it’s an impedes progress and doesn’t really help you much in achieving your goals. Like art school.
You’re missing the analogy.
Your argument is that you don’t have to go to college to be successful. Therefore, you probably shouldn’t go to college.
My argument is that you don’t have to use your right hand to be successful. Therefore, you probably shouldn’t use your right hand.
Both of these are bad arguments.
A better argument would be: The benefit gained from getting an art degree is not worth the cost of college.
But 1) this would require actually looking at the numbers, and 2) the numbers would probably suggest that college is a good investment (even for art majors).
Your argument is that you don’t have to go to college to be a successful. Therefore, you probably shouldn’t go to college.
Actually, my argument was that people in general shouldn’t go to college because they’ll major in useless crap. I don’t really think anyone should major in art stuff frankly (and other things).
You COULD be successful, but in this day and age college is a waste of time for arts (as I said, you do better by doing things you like and going at your own pace rather than doing something some pretentious jackoff assigned to you. Also should mention you learn more by DOING rather than just “practicing”).
Not using your right hand is a hindrance. Going to art school is a hindrance.
A better argument would be: The benefit gained from getting an art degree is not worth the cost of college.
That was my point though. You may have just misinterpreted.
the numbers would probably suggest that college is a good investment (even for art majors).
How?
Nathan I tire of this little debacle, either concede that 99% of art degrees are a waste of time and money, or just gunnae drap it.
Do you NEED an art degree to become a successful artist?
You yesterday:
Did you have to [go to Julliard] in order to become a successful musician?
I think it’s fair for me to characterize your argument as:
You don’t have to go to college to be successful.
I agree that this discussion is unlikely to lead to anything productive. I encourage you to concede that going to college is actually a benefit for most people.
It is misleading. The title is “You (Probably) Shouldn’t Go To College.” But you complain specifically about arts, language, and literature majors at private universities. This is not most people who go to college.
Asserting that humanities professors are pretentious jackoffs with dumbass interpretations is more easily interpreted as angry venting than as reasonable argument.
Think of it like this: People care if you graduated top of your class with a music degree from Julliard. Is it stupid? Maybe, but that’s how it is. I didn’t make the rules.
It’s actually for most art degrees in general, which includes nonsense degrees like “Gender Studies” and most sociology. Since these things are soft sciences they’re counted as art degrees instead of proper STEM.
https://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display.asp?id=37
Most of these are not STEM or Med-School.
“Social sciences” and a lot of psychology are soft sciences, and possibly even pseudosciences.
I’m not sure how else to explain it then. It’s self-evident.
Did you have to in order to become a successful musician?
You explicitly say at the start of your video that you recommend people go into psychology… You also use images of art supplies in your video whenever you say the word “art”. You also talk about getting paints from Michael’s as a substitute for an arts education. It seems goal-post shifting to now claim you were actually referring to liberal arts in general. It also doesn’t at all address the fact that most college students don’t go to private universities.
I don’t have to use my right hand to be successful. But it would be silly to make a video called “You (Probably) Shouldn’t Use Your Right Hand”.
Right but I also said in my response to you:
It was a type of shorthand. I actually wanted to use other pictures for “studies” degrees but Pixabay is fairly limited.
I thought it was implied when I said art degree and when I didn’t mention things like “studies” degrees in majors I recommend .
Of course, but most major in (not very useful) art degrees and many have crushing debt, unable to pay back loans.
Sure you could learn how to use your left hand, but it’s an impedes progress and doesn’t really help you much in achieving your goals. Like art school.
You’re missing the analogy.
Your argument is that you don’t have to go to college to be successful. Therefore, you probably shouldn’t go to college.
My argument is that you don’t have to use your right hand to be successful. Therefore, you probably shouldn’t use your right hand.
Both of these are bad arguments.
A better argument would be: The benefit gained from getting an art degree is not worth the cost of college.
But 1) this would require actually looking at the numbers, and 2) the numbers would probably suggest that college is a good investment (even for art majors).
Actually, my argument was that people in general shouldn’t go to college because they’ll major in useless crap. I don’t really think anyone should major in art stuff frankly (and other things).
You COULD be successful, but in this day and age college is a waste of time for arts (as I said, you do better by doing things you like and going at your own pace rather than doing something some pretentious jackoff assigned to you. Also should mention you learn more by DOING rather than just “practicing”).
Not using your right hand is a hindrance. Going to art school is a hindrance.
That was my point though. You may have just misinterpreted.
How?
Nathan I tire of this little debacle, either concede that 99% of art degrees are a waste of time and money, or just gunnae drap it.
You three days ago:
You yesterday:
I think it’s fair for me to characterize your argument as:
I agree that this discussion is unlikely to lead to anything productive. I encourage you to concede that going to college is actually a benefit for most people.
But you literally provided no evidence of such a claim.
https://youtu.be/xECUrlnXCqk