Academic

IN DEFENSE OF THE USELESS UNIVERSITY. I think that knowledge for its own sake is great. I just don?

By Glenn Reynolds

IN DEFENSE OF THE USELESS UNIVERSITY. I think that knowledge for its own sake is great. I just don’t think it should be purchased with massive quantities of borrowed money. And I’m betting that Socrates would have agreed. A Ferrari is beautiful, too, but we don’t encourage 18-year-olds to mortgage their futures for one. Meanwhile, I’m not so sure that the flow of academics from other countries to the U.S. disproves the notion that the U.S. is experiencing a higher education bubble. Rather the contrary, I would think.

UPDATE: Reader Tim Maguire writes:

Agreed that knowledge for its own sake is a good and valuable thing and I also think every university education should include a certain amount of it, but building a course of instruction around the humanities is a luxury of the affluent. The rest of us need jobs. So if we want to promote the pursuit of knowledge for its own sake, then we should promote the affluence that will allow people the luxury to pursue it.

Yes, the humanities originally flourished under rich patrons. Now they need a rich society. Yet, interestingly, folks in the humanities tend to argue against policies that promote a wealthy society.

Full post as published by Instapundit.com on January 07, 2011 (boomark / email).