Almost Classical

Is higher education a good value? Is the education "worth it" for students destined for debt and uncertain job prospects? I often write about the value of a liberal arts foundation — but that doesn't mean that I believe the most promising career prospects are in the humanities. Students asking me will be told they should focus on science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM), while they also have to be selecting within the STEM fields. Not every science has great job prospects, but I can predict that English and art majors are going to face much bleaker prospects. My position isn't a contradiction; it is nuanced. If you are going to pursue a four-year degree it should have a solid foundation of liberal arts knowledge. This is because it is unlikely that graduates will remain in a single field throughout their professional lives. The humanities encourage creativity and critical analysis. But, the traditional university education isn't for everyone. Thoug...

This column by Thomas Sowell  (http://www.tsowell.com/) has some points that need to be clarified, but the general concepts are important.  Those With Education Credentials In A Soft Field Can Breed Disaster - Investors.com First, Sowell is not  suggesting you should not be able to study whatever you want, as long as you  and your family  are paying for the degree. If the federal government (read: "taxpayers") are paying for an education, however, we need to consider promoting specific fields.  When institutions of higher learning turn out highly qualified doctors, scientists, engineers and others with skills that can raise the standard of living of a whole society and make possible a better and longer life, the benefits are obvious. What is not so obvious, but is painfully true nonetheless, is that colleges and universities can also turn out vast numbers of people with credentials, but with no marketable skills with which to fulfill ...

I am a believer in "behavioral economics," and am convinced human nature is neither rational nor predictable at the individual level. The " Austrian School " of economics, which is closer to my views on economics than any other general school, suggests that mathematical models in economics generally overstate the predictability of humans. I am seldom stunned or shocked when economic predictions are "unexpectedly" off the mark. Too many economists are convinced they conduct "science" when they are closer to the randomness of human psychology. I dislike generalities, but mentioning the Austrian School helps place my views in some context. Note : I have argued and will continue to argue too many "sciences" should have some other label. It would be best to simply call these disciplines "studies" than sciences. Economics is one such field. I love it, but is it science? Not like physics is a science. One reason the Austrian School i...