What does formal education mean to everybody? Coming from an area where it means fuck all(math), I don’t think it means much, unless of course you want a job (eg. Hawking was a low B student). I haven’t learned anything in a classroom that I couldn’t have read in a book. Also if you look at most of the people in strength training, they’d say that it’s really overrated, like Louie Simmons dropped out of high school, Poliquin doesn’t bother to put letters after his name, etc. Who agrees/disagrees?
Witout the formal education you wouldn’t be able to read a book.
I believe formal education has its purpose in our society, in that most people don’t have the self drive or motivation to learn something on there own. Think about it, if something wasn’t due next week, then you probably wouldn’t do it. I totally agree that anyone can pick up a book and learn almost anything one could ever want to know. In fact most of my education has been from me studying on my own. Even though I have classes, I really don’t learn until I sit down and study. But if a test wasn’t coming soon then I would probally be doing something else.
I think it was Mark Twain who said, “I’ve never been one to let school get in the way of my education.” Educate comes from Latin and means, “to bring out.” Thus, education is supposed to bring out what you have in your, i.e. to help you realize your potential. However, today’s formal education really only instructs you in a given dogma, and consequently tests your knowledge of said dogma. So to me, letters after a name really only means one thing: the person has mastered a given dogma. Maybe that dogma is correct, in which case those letters would mean A LOT to me. Let’s say Poliquin starts a school … and anyone who gets a Poliquin degree, can put “P.D.” after his name. Well, I’d sure be pretty impressed with those letters. I’d want to learn more about Joe Smith, P.D. I would probably even trust him in training me. But do I care if you have a Ph.D in English? Well, I sure won’t call you doctor, that’s certain. But I might want to talk Kafka with you. In fact, I’ll assume you CAN talk Kafka. But Jon Jones over there … he’s smarter than the Ph.D in English. Well, how am I supposed to know that - short of engaging in lengthy conversations with him? What prima facie (at face value) evidence will I have of his expertise? I think you get the point, namely that “letters” are helpful when we need to make decisions, within a limited time, as to the expertise of an individual.
Well, it depends on the school, doesn’t it? There’s a reason that a Harvard or Stanford education counts for more than a degree from Podunk U.
I’m in college right now. I feel your same sentiments. But, look at it as a legitimization process rather than a training process. Having that degree makes you legit more than anything, even though you can’t consider yourself trained until you have experience. More or less after ten years in the workforce you will have forgotten most of what you learned in the books, but getting that degree proves to employers than you CAN LEARN SOMETHING, and that you are dedicated.
You CAN learn anything by yourself. Will you? No. Going through college forces you to spend four years of your life studying a great deal about specific subjects, which is something that just won’t happen on its own. Plus you really need a degree to get and keep a good job.
School and degrees are what you make of it. If you want big money in life you don’t need a phd. I went back to school 9 years after walking away 1 paper short of obtaining my B.A. I went back so a financial planning company I have been with for the last 12 years would hire me. The sheepskin was their test. They wanted proof I could complete a project.
The bottom line they taught me is that the universities are full of bright people that can’t make money.
My last parting thoughts is I went to my firm because they offered a 3 year program to teach me my trade. I had to earn while I learned. It has made a huge impact on my life. My Dad & Brother have PHDs and don’t make shit for a living. Peace
No, most people probably won’t read & learn lots unless they’re getting tested on the material, but the cases where somebody does are always spectacular. Dan Duchaine didn’t even take biology at the high school level & he seemed to know a lot more than most doctors. Most of the math that is taught at the university level was developed by people who did theology/history/law in school and only did math sort of as a hobby because math wasn’t as glamourous back then hehe. Of course you don’t need a PhD to make big money. I know of engineering students who make $120,000 right out of school.
Well,some ppl love the glory of being able to feel superior by putting their letters after their names etc.
For me,I want formal education so I can get a good job that pays well.But I also view education as taught by my 11th grade english teacher:SCHOOL IS ONLY LIKE,25% of education,
the other 75%,u learn from the world.I like education as in,learning stuff NOT taught in schools,I like going to watch movies,theatres,symphonies,ballets,whatever floats your boat.We can’t learn that in classrooms.
I dunno but i think school is a small part, that's all.Reminds me of that pediatrician Dawg Porch talked about,he went to Johns Hopkind and he probably does not know jack about protein needs of our kind.
Does education make the difference between people who make it “to the top” and those who stay at a desk their entire lives? No. My background is engineering, and I’ve also had the privilege of spending a LOT of time around some VERY wealthy businessmen. Bottom line: People skills is what makes the difference, given equal education. I’ve seen a lot of very intelligent people who remain desk jockeys throughout their career. I’ve also seen a lot of executives who aren’t that intelligent in a numbers sense, but can influence people very well. Do I think education is IMPORTANT? Definitely, but it isn’t THE answer to success.
u also have to look at school from a social outlook…thing of all ur friends u have ever had, i would say about 60% u meet in a school…my point is school helps u became a productive member of society
I have to disagree with you when you say that “it depends on the school”. Ivy League educations and certificates DO mean more than Podunk U.'s, but not necessarily because of quality. The real difference is prestige, and the associated socioeconomic status (real or implied) that is tied to these schools and their students/alumni. Yes, Ivy league schools have turned out some great thinkers, but they have also turned out some real duds (Dubya and Mira Sorvino come to mind). At the same time, some of the most revolutionary minds in history have been, at best, mediocre students, and often, abject failures according to their report cards and/or GPA’s. I guess my point is that you can’t really quantify or qualify any person’s intellect by looking at where they went to college. It’s better to engage the person in a dialog and evaluate the merit of their ideas. But what do I know-I went to a Podunk school and got a liberal arts (Would you like fries with that?) education. Back to the grind…
Formal education is simply A key (notice I used “A” and not “the”) to potential opportunity. In my profession, I have been exposed to millionaires with MBAs and PhDs and also to millionaires who are high school drop outs. Being a success has more to do with internal drive than your formal education; however, a formal education can open doors that might otherwise remain unopened. While there are high school drop outs that have become very successful, the vast majority do not. If you want to play the odds, a formal education will provide you with a greater chance of being a success, but there are no guarantees in life. As someone mentioned previously, a lot of times, the formal education is simply an indication that you have the capability to learn and that you can make a commitment and follow it through. At the end of the day, you will be the most successful if you pursue a career that excites you and learn all you can - both formally and informally.
Part of ‘higher’ education is learning to learn. You learn about yourself while you learn about the subject matter. It can also help expose you to things you never would have thought about, or come across in life. It is valuable as a tool to further your life, but should not define your life…
I don't think letters after someone's name automatically makes them important, it just shows that they had the determination to stick it through many years of education and do a lot of work. That says something all on it's own.
right, there is a huge difference in formal education for the person who participates for the sake of a degree, which will in turn get them a job which will in turn get them money, and for the person who participates for the sake of knowledge.
as far as learning math solely from reading books, there have only been a few people in history who have been able to really do so significantly. (Galois, Ramanujan, etc.) most people need the help of others who have worked in a particular branch of math to fully comprehend it and hopefully get some sort of intuitive understanding. those instructors, through some chain of associations, recieved their own knowledge from the individuals who first developed the specific branch.
Archimedes didn’t have a school to go to, Euler did theology in school, Fermat was a lawyer, Newton only had a BA, Hermite needed 6 yrs to get his bachelor’s then he became chair at la sorbonne for 25yrs, Poncelet was a soldier, Abel only had a BA, Galois of course flunked both his entrance exams for his university & then solved (when he was 16) a 3000yr old problem using methods not taught until 4yr or grad school today (the Galois Theory), Cayley was a lawyer. They all read either books or articles by someone else or learned from someone, but not in a classroom. It’s not just the old-school guys who were like that. In the last 100yrs. of course there’s Einstein, Heisenberg’s thesis wasn’t unanimously accepted, de Broglie had his degrees in history, cambridge grad admissions took 1 look @ Hawking’s transcript & said forget it, Richard Borcherds (Fields Medalist in 1998) barely graduated. Anyway, I picked math because that’s what I think I know best, but Matt Damon dropped out of Harvard & won best screenplay for Good Will Hunting, Bill Gates dropped out of Harvard as well. I guess what I’m saying is everybody’s right & getting degrees means an employer will see someone who can work hard, but you don’t need to be in a classroom to learn anything.
I agree. IMO higher education should cease in teaching people what they want them to learn, and teach them how to learn. I.e., how to read and comprehend, how to think logically, how to write and get their thoughts across intelligently, etc. Not that all that is being taught a waste, but frankly, most and the most useful stuff that I have learned I have had to learn on my own. They just don’t offer enough classes covering real world useful information and too many on completely useless, impractical or purely theoretical info.
Hawking was a low B student in all but two subjects Physics and math. Einstein was also a poor student in all but those two subjects as well, although he did poorly because he could never understand french, the language he was taught in.
hi Natey, i see your point, but i have to mention that the examples you use are some of the greatest minds to have ever lived. i like math and i want to learn it, but i’m not anywhere near bright enough to do it on my own.