Referencing my earlier comment [0]. Caplan never says that the arts a waste of time. Refutes your view [1], main points are that this is an idealistic view; that enrichment requires willful participants which many if not most students are not, enthusiastic teachers, and good material. Says he loves the "useless" knowledge personally.

There's a reason that there's not much societal interest in many humanities topics covered in college outside of it. It's just apathy.

[0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19440353 [1] https://youtu.be/kCLGURUubzc?t=1893

> The arts and history teach us empathy and give us context of the human condition.

I disagree. These courses should be merely electives, if offered at all. The average person doesn't really have time for this stuff, they have a long road ahead of them and they need to spend more of their formative years preparing for the hard conditions of adult life.

You know what makes adult life harder? Being surrounded by close-minded, uneducated people who lack perspective and critical thinking skills.

I'm not here to defend useless humanities classes taught in high schools and colleges. Many of them are quite bad, but we need to raise the bar, not eliminate it.

Yeah, I guess being in poverty isn't so bad as long as you have an open mind and critical thinking skills.

Always with the intangible 'benefits' to people.

If what you're worried about is 'critical thinking skills' perhaps there should be a course modeled for that exact outcome.

How does learning about ancient history make you open minded? How does fictional literature make you open minded?

Maybe you should open your mind and consider that the lower class of people in society are really bad off financially and that our education system is doing exactly 0 to rectify that fact.

You seem to be all over this thread, so maybe you're replying as much to all the people disagreeing with you as you are to my comment specifically. I believe there's a bigger place for vocational education than it currently occupies, but I take issue with your disparagement of the humanities.

The humanities are important, both for individuals and for the body politic. History gives us a critical lens for looking at the present, fiction develops imaginative sympathy for others, grammar lets your voice be understood. Why should being poor exclude you from the use of history -- recognizing when you're being used by a rabble-rouser, literature -- understanding and being understood by your neighbors who may be different from you, or grammar -- being able to participate at even the most basic level in public debate? That's disenfranchisement. How do you suppose poverty is maintained?

And that's just the argument for humanities education for those in dire poverty. For the striving lower-middle class, music, art, civics, philosophy, and economics give you ways to understand yourself as a citizen and how to use wisely those resources you have.

> Why should being poor exclude you from the use of history -- recognizing when you're being used by a rabble-rouser, literature -- understanding and being understood by your neighbors who may be different from you, or grammar -- being able to participate at even the most basic level in public debate? That's disenfranchisement. How do you suppose poverty is maintained?

These are all nice sentiments, but not based in reality whatsoever.

How many kids drop out of high school because they view it as completely pointless? If you're in the 10th grade, you know you're not going to college because you can't afford it or you have the self awareness that you're not a good fit for one reason or another, why finish? What good is that 12th grade civics lesson to you?

If you think humanities are important, teach them on your own time on your own dime. The majority of people live in the real world, and the real world doesn't care anything about you, only what economic value you provide. You have to have money to live in this society, until that changes, humanities are a large waste of time for a large portion of the population.

Edit: removed snarky comment. Congratulations, you got under my skin.

Yeah, and that's why you would be so gullible when you reach the working age. You'll be listening to everything you're told because you'll never know any better.

I'm not sure what point you're trying to make.

You know who sounds gullible to me? An 18 year old kid taking out 10's of thousands of dollars for a 'liberal arts degree.' Literal definition of gullibility IMO.

I guess at least you'll feel better about yourself knowing you know 'things' while you're working at Starbucks.

Idk, if I had 10’s of thousands of dollars I’d pay that to have at least more than 2 women doing the same degree as I am.