So What's New?

In a recent piece in the NY Times by some Professor at some Midwest school he bemoans the state of Liberal Arts education.

Let us jump to his logic. He bemoans the fact that those who major in Liberal Arts, and he means it in the most narrow sense, earn less. He states:

Is the crisis rather one of harsh economic reality? Humanities majors on average start earning $31,000 per year and move to an average of $50,000 in their middle years. (The figures for writers and performing artists are much lower.) By contrast, business majors start with salaries 26 percent higher than humanities majors and move to salaries 51 percent higher.

But this data does not show that business majors earn more because they majored in business. Business majors may well be more interested in earning money and so accept jobs that pay well even if they are not otherwise fulfilling, whereas people interested in the humanities and the arts may be willing to take more fulfilling but lower-paying jobs. 

 First, young people should go to college and find a major that will get them a job, unless they are already independently wealthy. If you end up $200,000 in debt you owe it to those of us funding the debt to get to some point at which you can pay it back. If you want to be a performance artist what good is college, go out on the street and perform. So you do not get paid, what is new?

Second, the Liberal Arts has substantial value.  As an undergraduate I minored in Philosophy. Why, because it was interesting, a challenge, and it was fulfilling. Yet I knew that I could not get a job with that alone. Thus engineering, and a job. Yet engineering is also fulfilling, it is a profession, and has legs that last a lifetime as well, and it teaches a mental discipline that is essential in today's world.

Third, Liberal Arts is like a fine quality desert. It is wonderful, but you cannot live on deserts alone. One needs the protein of a sustainable diet. Thus balance in all things. Also one should not demand, expect, but be realistic.

Then the author really goes off the track. He states:

We could open up a large number of fulfilling jobs for humanists if  we developed an elite, professional faculty in our K-12 schools. Provide good salaries and good working conditions, and many humanists would find teaching immensely rewarding. Meeting the needs of this part of the cultural middle class could, in fact, be the key to saving our schools. ...

 Fair treatment for writers and artists is an even more difficult matter, which will ultimately require a major change in how we think about support for the arts. Fortunately, however, we already have an excellent model, in our support of athletics. Despite our general preference for capitalism, our support for sports is essentially socialist, with local and state governments providing enormous support for professional teams. To cite just one striking example, the Minnesota State Legislature recently appropriated over $500 million to help build the Vikings a new stadium. At the same time, the Minnesota Orchestra is close to financial disaster because it can’t erase a $6 million deficit. If the Legislature had diverted only 10 percent of its support for football, it would have covered that deficit for the next eight years.

 That's right, do not allow scientists or engineers to teach K-12, allow performance artists. That should really improve our scores on the world stage. Secondly, I have to admit I have never seen a football game, but my daughter went to WVU, but football pays, millions watch it, and also football and other sports have figured out how to get me to pay whether I watch it or not. They have made me pay on my cable channels! Never watch it but ESPN gets a $10 a month fee from me. Thanks Washington! Let's try to get the Philosophy Departments to see if they can do this.

When I see articles like this I often wonder what world the author is living in. Students go to college to get a job. Later on in life one can expand themselves, based upon a lifetime of experience.

Then there is the arrogance of demanding special treatment. As if these folks are something special. They are not. Ultimately all decisions are economic decisions, and yes with a moral undertone. If one decides to be a Classical French Major then one is making the decision to either attempt to to be the best in the world and get one of those three to five job slots, like the best violin player at some major world class orchestra. There just are not that many slots. Nor I gather are there that many slots for Quarterbacks in the NFL.